| Title |
Comparison of two different modes of molecular adsorbent recycling systems for liver dialysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Pediatric Nephrology, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00467-016-3451-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Euan Soo, Anja Sanders, Karlheinz Heckert, Tobias Vinke, Franz Schaefer, Claus Peter Schmitt |
| Abstract |
In children acute liver failure is a rare but life-threatening condition from which two-thirds do not recover with supportive therapy. Treatment is limited by the availability of liver transplants. Molecular adsorbent recirculating system (MARS) dialysis is a bridge to transplantation that enhances the chances of survival during the waiting period for a transplant, although it cannot improve survival. Open albumin dialysis (OPAL) is a new mode of albumin dialysis developed to further improve dialysis efficiency. We report a paediatric case of acute-on-chronic liver failure and compare the two modes of albumin dialysis, namely, the MARS and OPAL, used to treat this patient's cholestatic pruritus. Removal of total and direct bilirubin, ammonia and bile acids were measured by serial blood tests. There was an increased removal of bile acids with the OPAL mode, whereas the removal of total and direct bilirubin and ammonia was similar in both modes. The patient reported better improvement in pruritus following OPAL compared to dialysis with the MARS. OPAL may offer a better solution than the MARS in the treatment of refractory pruritus in liver failure. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 13% |
| Researcher | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 21% |
| Unknown | 5 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 42% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 8% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 29% |
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 July 2016.
All research outputs
#17,810,867
of 22,880,230 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Nephrology
#2,950
of 3,553 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#256,035
of 354,637 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Nephrology
#49
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,230 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,553 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 354,637 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.