| Title |
Conivaptan: a step forward in the treatment of hyponatremia?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, April 2008
|
| DOI | 10.2147/tcrm.s340 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Su Su Hline, Phuong-Truc T Pham, Phuong-Thu T Pham, May H Aung, Phuong-Mai T Pham, Phuong-Chi T Pham |
| Abstract |
Hyponatremia is one of the most common electrolyte abnormalities linked to adverse outcomes and increased mortality in hospitalized patients. While the differential diagnosis for hyponatremia is diverse, most cases stem from arginine vasopressin (AVP) dysregulation, where hypoosmolality fails to suppress AVP synthesis and release. The physiological effects of AVP are currently known to depend on its interaction with any of 3 receptor subtypes V1A, V2, and V1B. Activation of V2 by AVP is the key in renal water regulation and maintenance of total body volume and plasma tonicity. Despite the long-recognized problem with excess AVP in euvolemic and hypervolemic hyponatremia, traditional therapeutic options have relied on nonspecific and potentially problematic strategies. More recently, a new class of drugs, introduced as "aquaretics," has gained great attention among clinicians because of its ability to correct hyponatremia via direct competitive inhibition of AVP at V2 receptors to induce renal electrolyte-free water excretion. In this paper, we aim to review available clinical data on the only FDA-approved aquaretic, dual V1A/V2 receptor antagonist conivaptan, discuss its clinical indications, efficacy, safety profile, and comment on its clinical limitations. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 1 | 4% |
| Canada | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 21 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 9% |
| Librarian | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Unknown | 5 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 57% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 6 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 December 2014.
All research outputs
#5,379,156
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#269
of 1,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,449
of 95,975 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#4
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 95,975 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.