↓ Skip to main content

Resuscitation strategies with different arterial pressure targets after surgical management of traumatic shock

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 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
Resuscitation strategies with different arterial pressure targets after surgical management of traumatic shock
Published in
Critical Care, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13054-015-0897-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiaowu Bai, Wenkui Yu, Wu Ji, Kaipeng Duan, Shanjun Tan, Zhiliang Lin, Lin Xu, Ning Li

Abstract

Hypotensive fluid resuscitation has a better effect before and during surgical intervention for multiple trauma patients with haemorrhagic shock. However, it is questionable whether hypotensive fluid resuscitation is suitable after surgical intervention for these patients, and whether resuscitation with different mean arterial pressure (MAP) targets after surgical intervention can obtain different results. The aim of this study was to investigate these questions and to explore the underlying mechanisms. A total of 30 anesthetized piglets were randomly divided into 3 groups (n = 10 per group): low MAP, middle MAP, and high MAP, which had MAP targets of 60, 80, and 100 mmHg, respectively. All animals underwent femur fracture, intestine and liver injury, haemorrhagic shock, early hypotensive resuscitation, and surgical intervention. Then, the animals received fluid resuscitation with different MAP targets as mentioned above for 24 hours. Hemodynamic parameters and vital organ functions were evaluated. Fluid resuscitation in the 80 mmHg MAP group maintained haemodynamic stability, tissue perfusion, and organ function better than that in the other groups. The 60 mmHg MAP group presented with profound metabolic acidosis and organ histopathologic damage. In addition, animals in the 100 mmHg MAP group exhibited severe tissue oedema, organ function failure, and histopathologic damage. In our porcine model of resuscitation, targeting high MAP by fluid administration alone resulted in a huge increase in the infusion volume, severe tissue oedema, and organ dysfunction. Meanwhile, targeting low MAP resulted in persistent tissue hypoperfusion and metabolic stress. Hence, a resuscitation strategy of targeting appropriate MAP might be compatible with maintaining haemodynamic stability, tissue perfusion, and organ function.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 4%
Brazil 1 4%
Unknown 24 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 15%
Other 3 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Student > Master 3 12%
Other 6 23%
Unknown 4 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 65%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Unspecified 1 4%
Psychology 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 22 March 2019.
All research outputs
#4,239,729
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#3,027
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,190
of 395,408 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#249
of 466 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
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 83% 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 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.