| Title |
Low cost biological lung volume reduction therapy for advanced emphysema
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/copd.s112009 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mostafa Bakeer, Taha Taha Abdelgawad, Raed El-Metwaly, Ahmed El-Morsi, Mohammad Khairy El-Badrawy, Solafa El-Sharawy |
| Abstract |
Bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR), using biological agents, is one of the new alternatives to lung volume reduction surgery. To evaluate efficacy and safety of biological BLVR using low cost agents including autologous blood and fibrin glue. Enrolled patients were divided into two groups: group A (seven patients) in which autologous blood was used and group B (eight patients) in which fibrin glue was used. The agents were injected through a triple lumen balloon catheter via fiberoptic bronchoscope. Changes in high resolution computerized tomography (HRCT) volumetry, pulmonary function tests, symptoms, and exercise capacity were evaluated at 12 weeks postprocedure as well as for complications. In group A, at 12 weeks postprocedure, there was significant improvement in the mean value of HRCT volumetry and residual volume/total lung capacity (% predicted) (P-value: <0.001 and 0.038, respectively). In group B, there was significant improvement in the mean value of HRCT volumetry and (residual volume/total lung capacity % predicted) (P-value: 0.005 and 0.004, respectively). All patients tolerated the procedure with no mortality. BLVR using autologous blood and locally prepared fibrin glue is a promising method for therapy of advanced emphysema in term of efficacy, safety as well as cost effectiveness. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 66 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 14% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 14% |
| Unknown | 29 | 44% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 15% |
| Engineering | 4 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Unknown | 31 | 47% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 07 August 2016.
All research outputs
#16,720,137
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#1,613
of 2,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#242,202
of 381,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
#75
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,577 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 381,020 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.