↓ Skip to main content

Argatroban versus Lepirudin in critically ill patients (ALicia): a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Argatroban versus Lepirudin in critically ill patients (ALicia): a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Critical Care, October 2014
DOI 10.1186/s13054-014-0588-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tanja A Treschan, Maximilian S Schaefer, Johann Geib, Astrid Bahlmann, Tobias Brezina, Patrick Werner, Elisabeth Golla, Andreas Greinacher, Benedikt Pannen, Detlef Kindgen-Milles, Peter Kienbaum, Martin Beiderlinden

Abstract

IntroductionCritically ill patients often require renal replacement therapy accompanied by thrombocytopenia. Thrombocytopenia during heparin anticoagulation may be due to heparin-induced thrombocytopenia with need for alternative anticoagulation. Therefore, we compared argatroban and lepirudin in critically ill surgical patients.MethodsFollowing institutional review board approval and written informed consent, critically ill surgical patients more than or equal to 18 years with suspected heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, were randomly assigned to receive double-blind argatroban or lepirudin anticoagulation targeting an activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (aPTT) of 1.5 to 2 times baseline. In patients requiring continuous renal replacement therapy we compared the life-time of hemodialysis filters. We evaluated in all patients the incidence of bleeding and thrombembolic events.ResultsWe identified 66 patients with suspected heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, including 28 requiring renal replacement therapy. Mean filter lifetimes did not differ between groups (argatroban 32¿±¿25 hours (n =12) versus lepirudin 27¿±¿21 hours (n =16), mean difference 5 hours, 95% CI ¿13 to 23, P =0.227). Among all 66 patients, relevant bleeding occurred in four argatroban- versus eleven lepirudin-patients (OR 3.9, 95% CI 1.1 to 14.0, P =0.040). In the argatroban-group, three thromboembolic events occurred compared to two in the lepirudin group (OR 0.7, 95% CI 0.1 to 4.4, P =0.639). The incidence of confirmed heparin-induced thrombocytopenia was 23% (n =15) in our study population.ConclusionsThis first randomized controlled double-blind trial comparing two direct thrombin inhibitors showed comparable effectiveness for renal replacement therapy, but suggests fewer bleeds in surgical patients with argatroban anticoagulation.Trial registrationClinical Trials.gov NCT00798525. Registered 25 November 2008.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 48 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 18%
Researcher 7 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 8%
Student > Master 4 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 10 20%
Unknown 12 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 45%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Engineering 3 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 13 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 September 2021.
All research outputs
#6,753,240
of 25,368,786 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#3,793
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,794
of 273,489 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#75
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,368,786 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 273,489 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 161 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.