↓ Skip to main content

Impact of fluid challenge increase in cardiac output on the relationship between systemic and cerebral hemodynamics in severe sepsis compared to brain injury and controls

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Intensive Care, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 Mendeley
Title
Impact of fluid challenge increase in cardiac output on the relationship between systemic and cerebral hemodynamics in severe sepsis compared to brain injury and controls
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13613-018-0419-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthieu Le Dorze, Florian Huché, Clément Coelembier, Christophe Rabuel, Didier Payen

Abstract

Cognitive dysfunction and delirium after ICU are frequent and may partially result from brain ischemia episodes. We hypothesized that systemic inflammation (severe sepsis or septic shock) modifies the control of brain circulation and the relation between systemic and cerebral hemodynamic after a positive response to fluid challenge (FC). Three groups of patients were studied if they increased stroke volume (SV) > 10% after 250 or 500 ml of crystalloids: control group: patients free of comorbidity anesthetized for orthopedic surgery; sepsis group: patients with severe sepsis or septic shock (classic definition); brain injury (BI) group: trauma brain jury or hemorrhagic stroke with no detectable systemic inflammation. The measurements before and after FC were mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) (radial catheter); SV and cardiac output (CO; transesophageal Doppler); bilateral middle cerebral artery (MCAv) velocity with peak systolic (PSV) and end diastolic (EDV) values (transcranial Doppler); end-tidal CO2. The role of MAP increase was investigated by an arbitrarily threshold increase of 5%, called responder in CO and MAP (RR). The remaining patients were call responders in CO and non-responders in MAP (RnR). Nonparametric tests were used for statistical analysis. Among the 86 screened patients, 66 have completed the protocol: 17 in control group; 38 in sepsis group; and 11 in BI group. All patients increased SV > 10% after FC. Only the sepsis group increased MAP [+ 12 (2-25%), p < 0.05] with a significant increase in PSV and EDV [(17 (3-30)% and 17 (12-42)%, respectively (p < 0.05)], which did not change in the two other groups. The septic RR or RnR had similar variations in MCAv after FC. The baseline MAP < or > baseline median MAP had similar MCAv. After a FC-induced increase in SV, MCAv (PSV and EDV) increased only in septic group, mostly independently from MAP increase and from baseline MAP level. Cerebral perfusion becomes passively dependent on systemic blood flow, suggesting a modification of the control of cerebrovascular tone in sepsis-induced systemic inflammation. This information has been considered in the clinical management of septic patients.

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 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 17%
Researcher 9 13%
Student > Master 6 8%
Other 5 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 15 21%
Unknown 21 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 47%
Neuroscience 6 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 1%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 20 28%
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 01 July 2018.
All research outputs
#15,486,175
of 23,012,811 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#833
of 1,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,928
of 329,067 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#11
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,012,811 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 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 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 329,067 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.