↓ Skip to main content

Association between elevated central venous pressure and outcomes in critically ill patients

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Intensive Care, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
Title
Association between elevated central venous pressure and outcomes in critically ill patients
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13613-017-0306-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dong-kai Li, Xiao-ting Wang, Da-wei Liu

Abstract

Some prior studies have shown that elevated mean central venous pressure in certain patient populations and disease processes may lead to poor prognosis. However, these studies failed to generalize the concept of elevated central venous pressure (ECVP) load to all patients in critical care settings because of the limited cases and exclusive cohorts. The aim of the study was to investigate the association between elevated central venous pressure and outcomes in critical care. We performed a retrospective analysis on a single-center public database (MIMIC) of more than 9000 patients and more than 500,000 records of central venous pressure measurement. We evaluated the association between mean central venous pressure level and 28-day mortality after intensive care unit admission. The secondary outcomes were duration of mechanical ventilation, vasoactive drug use, laboratory results related to organ dysfunction and length of intensive care unit hospitalization. Accordingly, we proposed the concept of ECVP10 (the time sum of CVP above 10 mmHg) and investigated its association with outcome. There were 1645 deaths at 28 days after admission. Compared with the lowest quartile of mean central venous pressure [mean (SD) 7.4 (1.9) mmHg], the highest quartile [17.4 (4.1) mmHg] was associated with a 33.6% (95% CI 1.117-1.599) higher adjusted risk of death. Poor secondary outcomes were also associated with higher quartiles of elevated mean central venous pressure. After stratification by mean central venous pressure, elevated duration of central venous pressure above 10 mmHg was significantly higher in the non-survival group than in the survival group. Elevated central venous pressure level correlated with poor outcomes and prolonged treatment in critical care settings. Level and duration of elevated central venous pressure should be both evaluated to establish its cause and apply appropriate treatment.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 5 11%
Researcher 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 12 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 48%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 16 36%

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 15 August 2017.
All research outputs
#8,926,157
of 11,614,551 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#370
of 453 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#178,151
of 265,470 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#10
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,614,551 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 453 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 265,470 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.