↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

The importance of the thick ascending limb of Henle’s loop in renal physiology and pathophysiology

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Nephrology and Renovascular Disease, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 Mendeley
Title
The importance of the thick ascending limb of Henle’s loop in renal physiology and pathophysiology
Published in
International Journal of Nephrology and Renovascular Disease, February 2018
DOI 10.2147/ijnrd.s154000
Pubmed ID
Authors

Miriam Zacchia, Giovanna Capolongo, Luca Rinaldi, Giovambattista Capasso

Abstract

The thick ascending limb (TAL) of Henle's loop is a crucial segment for many tasks of the nephron. Indeed, the TAL is not only a mainstay for reabsorption of sodium (Na+), potassium (K+), and divalent cations such as calcium (Ca2+) and magnesium (Mg2+) from the luminal fluid, but also has an important role in urine concentration, overall acid-base homeostasis, and ammonia cycle. Transcellular Na+transport along the TAL is a prerequisite for Na+, K+, Ca2+, Mg2+homeostasis, and water reabsorption, the latter through its contribution in the generation of the cortico-medullar osmotic gradient. The role of this nephron site in acid-base balance, via bicarbonate reabsorption and acid secretion, is sometimes misunderstood by clinicians. This review describes in detail these functions, reporting in addition to the well-known molecular mechanisms, some novel findings from the current literature; moreover, the pathophysiology and the clinical relevance of primary or acquired conditions caused by TAL dysfunction are discussed. Knowing the physiology of the TAL is fundamental for clinicians, for a better understanding and management of rare and common conditions, such as tubulopathies, hypertension, and loop diuretics abuse.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 77 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 21%
Student > Bachelor 12 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Student > Master 5 6%
Researcher 4 5%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 26 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 19%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 9%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 24 31%
Attention Score in Context

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 16 February 2018.
All research outputs
#14,092,894
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nephrology and Renovascular Disease
#103
of 240 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#232,387
of 440,112 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nephrology and Renovascular Disease
#5
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 240 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 440,112 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.