↓ Skip to main content

Driving-pressure-independent protective effects of open lung approach against experimental acute respiratory distress syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, September 2018
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 (91st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
52 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
Driving-pressure-independent protective effects of open lung approach against experimental acute respiratory distress syndrome
Published in
Critical Care, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13054-018-2154-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kentaro Tojo, Tasuku Yoshida, Takuya Yazawa, Takahisa Goto

Abstract

The open lung approach (OLA) reportedly has lung-protective effects against acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Recently, lowering of the driving pressure (ΔP), rather than improvement in lung aeration per se, has come to be considered as the primary lung-protective mechanism of OLA. However, the driving pressure-independent protective effects of OLA have never been evaluated in experimental studies. We here evaluated whether OLA shows protective effects against experimental ARDS even when the ΔP is not lowered. Lipopolysaccharide was intratracheally administered to rats to establish experimental ARDS. After 24 h, rats were mechanically ventilated and randomly allocated to the OLA or control group. In the OLA group, 5 cmH2O positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and recruitment maneuver (RM) were applied. Neither PEEP nor RM was applied to the rats in the control group. Dynamic ΔP was kept at 15 cmH2O in both groups. After 6 h of mechanical ventilation, rats in both groups received RM to inflate reversible atelectasis of the lungs. Arterial blood gas analysis, lung computed tomography, histological evaluation, and comprehensive biochemical analysis were performed. OLA significantly improved lung aeration, arterial oxygenation, and gas exchange. Even after RM in both groups, the differences in these parameters between the two groups persisted, indicating that the atelectasis-induced respiratory dysfunction observed in the control group is not an easily reversible functional problem. Lung histological damage was severe in the dorsal dependent area in both groups, but was attenuated by OLA. White blood cell counts, protein concentrations, and tissue injury markers in the broncho-alveolar lavage fluid (BALF) were higher in the control than in the OLA group. Furthermore, levels of CXCL-7, a platelet-derived chemokine, were higher in the BALF from the control group, indicating that OLA protects the lungs by suppressing platelet activation. OLA shows protective effects against experimental ARDS, even when the ΔP is not decreased. In addition to reducing ΔP, maintaining lung aeration seems to be important for lung protection in ARDS.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 52 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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 19%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 9%
Other 3 7%
Student > Master 3 7%
Other 9 21%
Unknown 12 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 58%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Psychology 1 2%
Engineering 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 12 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 03 October 2018.
All research outputs
#1,354,277
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#1,171
of 6,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,635
of 350,796 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#36
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,555 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 done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 350,796 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 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 64% of its contemporaries.