↓ Skip to main content

Perioperative fluid and volume management: physiological basis, tools and strategies

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Intensive Care, March 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
96 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
257 Mendeley
Title
Perioperative fluid and volume management: physiological basis, tools and strategies
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care, March 2011
DOI 10.1186/2110-5820-1-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mike S Strunden, Kai Heckel, Alwin E Goetz, Daniel A Reuter

Abstract

Fluid and volume therapy is an important cornerstone of treating critically ill patients in the intensive care unit and in the operating room. New findings concerning the vascular barrier, its physiological functions, and its role regarding vascular leakage have lead to a new view of fluid and volume administration. Avoiding hypervolemia, as well as hypovolemia, plays a pivotal role when treating patients both perioperatively and in the intensive care unit. The various studies comparing restrictive vs. liberal fluid and volume management are not directly comparable, do not differ (in most instances) between colloid and crystalloid administration, and mostly do not refer to the vascular barrier's physiologic basis. In addition, very few studies have analyzed the use of advanced hemodynamic monitoring for volume management.This article summarizes the current literature on the relevant physiology of the endothelial surface layer, discusses fluid shifting, reviews available research on fluid management strategies and the commonly used fluids, and identifies suitable variables for hemodynamic monitoring and their goal-directed use.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 257 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 3 1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Bulgaria 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Ecuador 1 <1%
Other 5 2%
Unknown 241 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 48 19%
Student > Postgraduate 31 12%
Student > Master 28 11%
Researcher 27 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 10%
Other 66 26%
Unknown 31 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 186 72%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 4%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 5 2%
Arts and Humanities 3 1%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 1%
Other 10 4%
Unknown 40 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 02 April 2013.
All research outputs
#20,187,333
of 22,703,044 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#946
of 1,034 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,733
of 108,439 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#9
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,703,044 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,034 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 108,439 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.