↓ Skip to main content

Molecular adsorbent recirculating system and single-pass albumin dialysis in liver failure – a prospective, randomised crossover study

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, January 2016
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

twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
72 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
109 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
Molecular adsorbent recirculating system and single-pass albumin dialysis in liver failure – a prospective, randomised crossover study
Published in
Critical Care, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13054-015-1159-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christoph Sponholz, Katja Matthes, Dina Rupp, Wolf Backaus, Sebastian Klammt, Diana Karailieva, Astrid Bauschke, Utz Settmacher, Matthias Kohl, Mark G. Clemens, Steffen Mitzner, Michael Bauer, Andreas Kortgen

Abstract

The aim of extracorporeal albumin dialysis (ECAD) is to reduce endogenous toxins accumulating in liver failure. To date, ECAD is conducted mainly with the Molecular Adsorbents Recirculating System (MARS). However, single-pass albumin dialysis (SPAD) has been proposed as an alternative. The aim of this study was to compare the two devices with a prospective, single-centre, non-inferiority crossover study design with particular focus on reduction of bilirubin levels (primary endpoint) and influence on paraclinical and clinical parameters (secondary endpoints) associated with liver failure. Patients presenting with liver failure were screened for eligibility and after inclusion were randomly assigned to be started on either conventional MARS or SPAD (with 4 % albumin and a dialysis flow rate of 700 ml/h). Statistical analyses were based on a linear mixed-effects model. Sixty-nine crossover cycles of ECAD in 32 patients were completed. Both systems significantly reduced plasma bilirubin levels to a similar extent (MARS: median -68 μmol/L, interquartile range [IQR] -107.5 to -33.5, p = 0.001; SPAD: -59 μmol/L, -84.5 to +36.5, p = 0.001). However, bile acids (MARS: -39 μmol/L, -105.6 to -8.3, p < 0.001; SPAD: -9 μmol/L, -36.9 to +11.4, p = 0.131), creatinine (MARS: -24 μmol/L, -46.5 to -8.0, p < 0.001; SPAD: -2 μmol/L, -9.0 to +7.0/L, p = 0.314) and urea (MARS: -0.9 mmol/L, -1.93 to -0.10, p = 0.024; SPAD: -0.1 mmol/L, -1.0 to +0.68, p = 0.523) were reduced and albumin-binding capacity was increased (MARS: +10 %, -0.8 to +20.9 %, p < 0.001; SPAD: +7 %, -7.5 to +15.5 %, p = 0.137) only by MARS. Cytokine levels of interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-8 and hepatic encephalopathy were altered by neither MARS nor SPAD. Both procedures were safe for temporary extracorporeal liver support. While in clinical practice routinely assessed plasma bilirubin levels were reduced by both systems, only MARS affected other paraclinical parameters (i.e., serum bile acids, albumin-binding capacity, and creatinine and urea levels). Caution should be taken with regard to metabolic derangements and electrolyte disturbances, particularly in SPAD using regional citrate anti-coagulation. German Clinical Trials Register ( www.drks.de ) DRKS00000371 . Registered 8 April 2010.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 108 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 17%
Student > Postgraduate 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 12 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Other 9 8%
Other 23 21%
Unknown 25 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 53 49%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 5%
Engineering 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 7 6%
Unknown 30 28%
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 08 April 2021.
All research outputs
#4,279,808
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#3,051
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,491
of 399,781 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#271
of 494 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 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 399,781 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 494 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.