↓ Skip to main content

The Role of the Complement Cascade in Ischemia/Reperfusion Injury: Implications for Neuroprotection

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Medicine, June 2001
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

patent
3 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
119 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 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
The Role of the Complement Cascade in Ischemia/Reperfusion Injury: Implications for Neuroprotection
Published in
Molecular Medicine, June 2001
DOI 10.1007/bf03402183
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anthony L. D’Ambrosio, David J. Pinsky, E. Sander Connolly

Abstract

The complement cascade plays a deleterious role in multiple models of ischemia/reperfusion (I/R) injury, including stroke. Investigation of the complement cascade may provide a critical approach to identifying neuroprotective strategies that can be effective at clinically relevant time points in cerebral ischemia. This review of the literature describes the deleterious effects of complement activation in systemic I/R models and previous attempts at therapeutic complement inhibition, with a focus on the potential role of complement inhibition in ischemic neuroprotection. Translation of these concepts into ischemic stroke models and exploration of related neuroprotective strategies are also reviewed. We performed a MEDLINE search to identify any studies published between 1966 and 2001 dealing with complement activation in the setting of I/R injury. We also searched for studies demonstrating up-regulation of any complement components within the central nervous system during inflammation and/or ischemia. The temporal and mechanistic overlap of the complement cascade with other biochemical events occurring in cerebral I/R injury is quite complex and is only beginning to be understood. However, there is compelling evidence that complement is quite active in the setting of acute stroke, suggesting that anticomplement strategies should be further investigated through genetic analysis, nonhuman primate models, and clinical investigations.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 3%
Unknown 70 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 17%
Researcher 12 17%
Student > Bachelor 12 17%
Student > Master 9 13%
Other 7 10%
Other 13 18%
Unknown 7 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 24 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 28%
Neuroscience 7 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 6%
Physics and Astronomy 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 11 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 13 April 2021.
All research outputs
#8,537,346
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Medicine
#419
of 1,206 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,153
of 41,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Medicine
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,206 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. 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 41,879 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.