↓ Skip to main content

Influence of in-line microfilters on systemic inflammation in adult critically ill patients: a prospective, randomized, controlled open-label trial

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Intensive Care, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
Title
Influence of in-line microfilters on systemic inflammation in adult critically ill patients: a prospective, randomized, controlled open-label trial
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13613-015-0080-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ilse Gradwohl-Matis, Andreas Brunauer, Daniel Dankl, Elisabeth Wirthel, Ingeborg Meburger, Angela Bayer, Michaela Mandl, Martin W. Dünser, Wilhelm Grander

Abstract

In critically ill children, in-line microfilters may reduce the incidence of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), the overall complication and organ dysfunction rate. No data on the use of in-line microfilters exist in critically ill adults. In this prospective, randomized, controlled open-label study, we evaluated the influence of in-line microfilters on systemic immune activation in 504 critically ill adults with a central venous catheter in place and an expected length of stay in the intensive care unit >24 h. Patients were randomized to have in-line microfilters placed into all intravenous lines (intervention group) or usual care (control group). The primary endpoint was the number of intensive care unit days with SIRS. Secondary endpoints were the incidence of SIRS, SIRS criteria per day, duration of invasive mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit length of stay, the incidence of acute lung injury, maximum C-reactive protein, maximum white blood cell count, incidence of new candida and/or central-line-associated bloodstream infections, incidence of new thromboembolic complications, cumulative insulin requirements and presence of hyper- or hypoglycemia. The study groups did not differ in any baseline variable. There was no difference in the number of days in the intensive care unit with SIRS between microfilter and control patients [2 (0.8-4.7) vs. 1.8 (0.7-4.4), p = 0.62]. Except for a higher incidence of SIRS in microfilter patients (99.6 vs. 96.8 %, p = 0.04), no difference between the groups was observed in any secondary outcome parameter. Results did not change when only patients with an intensive care unit length of stay of greater than 7 days were included in the analysis. The rate of adverse events was comparable between microfilter and control patients. In two patients allocated to the microfilter group, the study intervention was discontinued for technical reasons. Use of in-line microfilters was associated with additional costs. The use of in-line microfilters failed to modulate systemic inflammation and clinical outcome parameters in critically ill adults. Clinical Trials NCT01534390.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sweden 1 2%
Unknown 46 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 17%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Other 5 11%
Researcher 5 11%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 14 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 4%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 15 32%
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 12 November 2015.
All research outputs
#20,295,501
of 22,832,057 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#955
of 1,043 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#239,103
of 285,322 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#17
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,832,057 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,043 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 285,322 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 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.