↓ Skip to main content

Net ultrafiltration intensity and mortality in critically ill patients with fluid overload

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
85 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
81 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 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
Net ultrafiltration intensity and mortality in critically ill patients with fluid overload
Published in
Critical Care, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13054-018-2163-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Raghavan Murugan, Vikram Balakumar, Samantha J. Kerti, Priyanka Priyanka, Chung-Chou H. Chang, Gilles Clermont, Rinaldo Bellomo, Paul M. Palevsky, John A. Kellum

Abstract

Although net ultrafiltration (UFNET) is frequently used for treatment of fluid overload in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury, the optimal intensity of UFNET is unclear. Among critically ill patients with fluid overload receiving renal replacement therapy (RRT), we examined the association between UFNET intensity and risk-adjusted 1-year mortality. We selected patients with fluid overload ≥ 5% of body weight prior to initiation of RRT from a large academic medical center ICU dataset. UFNET intensity was calculated as the net volume of fluid ultrafiltered per day from initiation of either continuous or intermittent RRT until the end of ICU stay adjusted for patient hospital admission body weight. We stratified UFNET as low (≤ 20 ml/kg/day), moderate (> 20 to ≤ 25 ml/kg/day) or high (> 25 ml/kg/day) intensity. We adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, race, surgery, baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate, oliguria, first RRT modality, pre-RRT fluid balance, duration of RRT, time to RRT initiation from ICU admission, APACHE III score, mechanical ventilation use, suspected sepsis, mean arterial pressure on day 1 of RRT, cumulative fluid balance during RRT and cumulative vasopressor dose during RRT. We fitted logistic regression for 1-year mortality, Gray's survival model and propensity matching to account for indication bias. Of 1075 patients, the distribution of high, moderate and low-intensity UFNET groups was 40.4%, 15.2% and 44.2% and 1-year mortality was 59.4% vs 60.2% vs 69.7%, respectively (p = 0.003). Using logistic regression, high-intensity compared with low-intensity UFNET was associated with lower mortality (adjusted odds ratio 0.61, 95% CI 0.41-0.93, p = 0.02). Using Gray's model, high UFNET was associated with decreased mortality up to 39 days after ICU admission (adjusted hazard ratio range 0.50-0.73). After combining low and moderate-intensity UFNET groups (n = 258) and propensity matching with the high-intensity group (n = 258), UFNET intensity > 25 ml/kg/day compared with ≤ 25 ml/kg/day was associated with lower mortality (57% vs 67.8%, p = 0.01). Findings were robust to several sensitivity analyses. Among critically ill patients with ≥ 5% fluid overload and receiving RRT, UFNET intensity > 25 ml/kg/day compared with ≤ 20 ml/kg/day was associated with lower 1-year risk-adjusted mortality. Whether tolerating intensive UFNET is just a marker for recovery or a mediator requires further research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 85 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 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 98 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 11%
Other 9 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Student > Postgraduate 9 9%
Student > Master 9 9%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 37 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 44 45%
Psychology 3 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 40 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 47. 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 October 2020.
All research outputs
#900,744
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#666
of 6,613 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,020
of 351,726 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#18
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,613 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 351,726 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.