↓ Skip to main content

Automated bedside flow cytometer for mHLA-DR expression measurement: a comparison study with reference protocol

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
Title
Automated bedside flow cytometer for mHLA-DR expression measurement: a comparison study with reference protocol
Published in
Intensive Care Medicine Experimental, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40635-017-0156-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mehdi Zouiouich, Morgane Gossez, Fabienne Venet, Thomas Rimmelé, Guillaume Monneret

Abstract

In various ICU conditions, measurement of diminished expression of human leukocyte antigen-DR on circulating monocytes (mHLA-DR) by flow cytometry appears to be a reliable marker of acquired immunosuppression. Low mHLA-DR is associated with an increased risk of nosocomial infections and mortality. Nevertheless, its use remains somewhat limited and has not been adopted in common medical practice. The main drawback of mHLA-DR measurement is likely related to the use of flow cytometry that is not accessible everywhere on a 24/7 basis. Recently, the Accellix system, a fully automated table top cytometer, was developed for use at bedside or emergency labs. The objective was to assess the performance of the Accellix (beta site evaluation including repeatability and method comparison with reference protocol) for the measurement of mHLA-DR expression. Accellix repeatability at low and high expression levels of mHLA-DR was < 10% (i.e., within the range of acceptability for clinical flow cytometry). In comparison study including 139 blood samples (67 septic shock patients and 17 healthy volunteers), Pearson's correlation parameters (r (2)) ranged from 0.71 to 0.97 (p < 0.001). Intra-class correlation coefficient was 0.92. This fully automated table top cytometer appears to be a suitable tool for ICU patient monitoring and on-going clinical trials as there is no sample preparation and no need for specific skills in flow cytometry. Upon validation in a larger cohort study to reinforce reliability, Accellix could represent a major step to make flow cytometry accessible to clinicians by placing the instrument inside intensive care units or emergency laboratories.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 21%
Researcher 3 21%
Student > Bachelor 2 14%
Student > Master 1 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 21%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 7%
Arts and Humanities 1 7%
Psychology 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 5 36%
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 11 September 2017.
All research outputs
#15,477,045
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from Intensive Care Medicine Experimental
#268
of 449 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#197,997
of 315,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Intensive Care Medicine Experimental
#11
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 449 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 315,743 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.