↓ Skip to main content

Sepsis-induced myocardial dysfunction: pathophysiology and management

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Intensive Care, March 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 (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

31 tweeters
7 Facebook pages


248 Dimensions

Readers on

394 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.
Sepsis-induced myocardial dysfunction: pathophysiology and management
Published in
Journal of Intensive Care, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40560-016-0148-1
Pubmed ID

Yasuyuki Kakihana, Takashi Ito, Mayumi Nakahara, Keiji Yamaguchi, Tomotsugu Yasuda


Sepsis is aggravated by an inappropriate immune response to invading microorganisms, which occasionally leads to multiple organ failure. Several lines of evidence suggest that the ventricular myocardium is depressed during sepsis with features of diastolic dysfunction. Potential candidates responsible for septic cardiomyopathy include pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs), cytokines, and nitric oxide. Extracellular histones and high-mobility group box 1 that function as endogenous damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs) also contribute to the myocardial dysfunction associated with sepsis. If untreated, persistent shock causes cellular injury and the liberation of further DAMPs. Like PAMPs, DAMPs have the potential to activate inflammation, creating a vicious circle. Early infection control with adequate antibiotic care is important during septic shock to decrease PAMPs arising from invasive microorganisms. Early aggressive fluid resuscitation as well as the administration of vasopressors and inotropes is also important to reduce DAMPs generated by damaged cells although excessive volume loading, and prolonged administration of catecholamines might be harmful. This review delineates some features of septic myocardial dysfunction, assesses its most common underlying mechanisms, and briefly outlines current therapeutic strategies and potential future approaches.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 31 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 394 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Pakistan 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 387 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 59 15%
Student > Master 44 11%
Other 41 10%
Student > Bachelor 39 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 10%
Other 106 27%
Unknown 67 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 233 59%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 11 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 8 2%
Other 34 9%
Unknown 80 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 07 July 2020.
All research outputs
of 21,112,644 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Intensive Care
of 477 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 280,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Intensive Care
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,112,644 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 477 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 280,298 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them