↓ Skip to main content

Iatrogenic salt water drowning and the hazards of a high central venous pressure

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Intensive Care, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
3 blogs
twitter
26 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
143 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
226 Mendeley
Title
Iatrogenic salt water drowning and the hazards of a high central venous pressure
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care, June 2014
DOI 10.1186/s13613-014-0021-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul E Marik

Abstract

Current teaching and guidelines suggest that aggressive fluid resuscitation is the best initial approach to the patient with hemodynamic instability. The source of this wisdom is difficult to discern, however, Early Goal Directed therapy (EGDT) as championed by Rivers et al. and the Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines appears to have established this as the irrefutable truth. However, over the last decade it has become clear that aggressive fluid resuscitation leading to fluid overload is associated with increased morbidity and mortality across a diverse group of patients, including patients with severe sepsis as well as elective surgical and trauma patients and those with pancreatitis. Excessive fluid administration results in increased interstitial fluid in vital organs leading to impaired renal, hepatic and cardiac function. Increased extra-vascular lung water (EVLW) is particularly lethal, leading to iatrogenic salt water drowning. EGDT and the Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines recommend targeting a central venous pressure (CVP) > 8 mmHg. A CVP > 8 mmHg has been demonstrated to decrease microcirculatory flow, as well as renal blood flow and is associated with an increased risk of renal failure and death. Normal saline (0.9% salt solution) as compared to balanced electrolyte solutions is associated with a greater risk of acute kidney injury and death. This paper reviews the adverse effects of large volume resuscitation, a high CVP and the excessive use of normal saline.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 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 226 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Turkey 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 217 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 35 15%
Student > Postgraduate 28 12%
Student > Master 26 12%
Researcher 20 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 8%
Other 67 30%
Unknown 31 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 163 72%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 1%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 1%
Psychology 3 1%
Other 14 6%
Unknown 34 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 41. 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 24 January 2019.
All research outputs
#1,012,259
of 25,654,566 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#113
of 1,208 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,635
of 243,325 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#1
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,566 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,208 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 243,325 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them