↓ Skip to main content

Noradrenaline and the kidney: friends or foes?

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, October 2001
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
117 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 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
Noradrenaline and the kidney: friends or foes?
Published in
Critical Care, October 2001
DOI 10.1186/cc1052
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rinaldo Bellomo, David Di Giantomasso

Abstract

Septic shock, systemic inflammation and pharmacological vasodilatation are often complicated by systemic hypotension, despite aggressive fluid resuscitation and an increased cardiac output. If the physician wishes to restore arterial pressure (>80-85 mmHg), with the aim of sustaining organ perfusion pressure, the administration of systemic vasopressor agents, such as noradrenaline, becomes necessary. Because noradrenaline induces vasoconstriction in many vascular beds (visibly in the skin), however, it may decrease renal and visceral blood flow, impairing visceral organ function. This unproven fear has stopped clinicians from using noradrenaline more widely. In vasodilated states, unlike in normal circulatory conditions, however, noradrenaline may actually improve visceral organ blood flow. Animal studies show that the increased organ perfusion pressures achieved with noradrenaline improve the glomerular filtration rate and renal blood flow. There are no controlled human data to define the effects of noradrenaline on the kidney, but many patient series show a positive effect on glomerular filtration rate and urine output. There is no reason to fear the use of noradrenaline. If it is used to support a vasodilated circulation with a normal or increased cardiac output, it is likely to be the kidney's friend not its foe.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
Turkey 1 1%
Unknown 87 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 15 17%
Researcher 12 13%
Student > Postgraduate 7 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 7%
Other 21 24%
Unknown 21 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 52%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 2%
Unspecified 2 2%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 25 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 26 June 2017.
All research outputs
#8,535,472
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#4,397
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,521
of 45,481 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#6
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 45,481 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.