↓ Skip to main content

Nebulized antibiotics in mechanically ventilated patients: a challenge for translational research from technology to clinical care

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Intensive Care, August 2017
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)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
20 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
Title
Nebulized antibiotics in mechanically ventilated patients: a challenge for translational research from technology to clinical care
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13613-017-0301-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephan Ehrmann, Jean Chastre, Patrice Diot, Qin Lu

Abstract

Nebulized antibiotic therapy directly targets airways and lung parenchyma resulting in high local concentrations and potentially lower systemic toxicities. Experimental and clinical studies have provided evidence for elevated lung concentrations and rapid bacterial killing following the administration of nebulized antibiotics during mechanical ventilation. Delivery of high concentrations of antibiotics to infected lung regions is the key to achieving efficient nebulized antibiotic therapy. However, current non-standardized clinical practice, the difficulties with implementing optimal nebulization techniques and the lack of robust clinical data have limited its widespread adoption. The present review summarizes the techniques and clinical constraints for optimal delivery of nebulized antibiotics to lung parenchyma during invasive mechanical ventilation. Pulmonary pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of nebulized antibiotic therapy to treat ventilator-associated pneumonia are discussed and put into perspective. Experimental and clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics support the use of nebulized antibiotics. However, its clinical benefits compared to intravenous therapy remain to be proved. Future investigations should focus on continuous improvement of nebulization practices and techniques. Before expanding its clinical use, careful design of large phase III randomized trials implementing adequate therapeutic strategies in targeted populations is required to demonstrate the clinical effectiveness of nebulized antibiotics in terms of patient outcomes and reduction in the emergence of antibiotic resistance.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 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 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 80 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 14%
Other 10 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Student > Master 6 8%
Other 18 23%
Unknown 22 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 8%
Unspecified 3 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 3%
Other 12 15%
Unknown 23 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 May 2021.
All research outputs
#1,473,108
of 22,996,001 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#168
of 1,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,443
of 317,441 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#1
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,996,001 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 1,052 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 317,441 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 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.