↓ Skip to main content

Benefit profile of recombinant human soluble thrombomodulin in sepsis-induced disseminated intravascular coagulation: a multicenter propensity score analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
68 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
Benefit profile of recombinant human soluble thrombomodulin in sepsis-induced disseminated intravascular coagulation: a multicenter propensity score analysis
Published in
Critical Care, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13054-015-0810-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jumpei Yoshimura, Kazuma Yamakawa, Hiroshi Ogura, Yutaka Umemura, Hiroki Takahashi, Miki Morikawa, Yoshiaki Inoue, Satoshi Fujimi, Hiroshi Tanaka, Toshimitsu Hamasaki, Takeshi Shimazu

Abstract

The safety and efficacy of recombinant human soluble thrombomodulin (rhTM) have been demonstrated, with promising evidence suggestive of efficacy for patients with severe sepsis involving coagulopathy in a phase IIb randomized controlled trial. However, the benefit profiles of rhTM have not been elucidated. The purpose of this study was to explore whether patients with greater disease severity, determined according to the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores, would experience treatment benefit from rhTM administration. This was a post hoc, subgroup analysis of a multicenter retrospective cohort study conducted in three Japanese tertiary referral hospitals. Patients with sepsis-induced disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) who required ventilator management were included. We stratified patients into several strata according to disease severity, determined by APACHE II and SOFA scores, using classification and regression trees for survival data. Intervention effects, expressed as hazard ratios (HR), were analyzed using Cox regression analysis adjusted for a propensity model to detect subgroup heterogeneity of the effects of rhTM on in-hospital mortality. Participants were 162 patients with sepsis-induced DIC; 68 of these patients received rhTM and 94 did not. After adjusting for imbalances, rhTM administration was significantly associated with reduced mortality in high-risk patients (APACHE II: 24 to 29; HR: 0.281; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.093 to 0.850; P = 0.025). A similar nonsignificant tendency was observed in the very high-risk subset (APACHE II: ≥30; HR: 0.529; 95% CI: 0.202 to 1.387; P = 0.195) but was not evident in the moderate-risk subset of patients (APACHE II: <24; HR: 0.814; 95% CI: 0.351 to 1.884; P = 0.630). A similar tendency was observed in analysis of SOFA scores (moderate-risk subset (SOFA: <11), P = 0.368; high-risk subset (SOFA: ≥11), P = 0.042). Survival benefit was observed with rhTM treatment in sepsis-induced DIC and high risk of death according to baseline APACHE II and SOFA scores.

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 %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 14%
Other 6 12%
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 12%
Lecturer 4 8%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 13 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 53%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 14 29%
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 06 July 2022.
All research outputs
#6,754,036
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#3,794
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,695
of 395,408 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#325
of 466 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 395,408 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 466 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.