↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Angiotensin II: a new therapeutic option for vasodilatory shock

Overview of attention for article published in Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
Title
Angiotensin II: a new therapeutic option for vasodilatory shock
Published in
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, July 2018
DOI 10.2147/tcrm.s150434
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rachel L Bussard, Laurence W Busse

Abstract

Angiotensin II (Ang II), part of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAS), is a potent vasoconstrictor and has been recently approved for use by the US Food and Drug Administration in high-output shock. Though not a new drug, the recently published Angiotensin II for the Treatment of High Output Shock (ATHOS-3) trial, as well as a number of retrospective analyses have sparked renewed interest in the use of Ang II, which may have a role in treating refractory shock. We describe refractory shock, the unique mechanism of action of Ang II, RAS dysregulation in shock, and the evidence supporting the use of Ang II to restore blood pressure. Evidence suggests that Ang II may preferentially be of benefit in acute kidney injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome, where the RAS is known to be disrupted. Additionally, there may be a role for Ang II in cardiogenic shock, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor overdose, cardiac arrest, liver failure, and in settings of extracorporeal circulation.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 6 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Unspecified 4 8%
Researcher 4 8%
Other 13 25%
Unknown 17 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 32%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 11%
Unspecified 4 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Psychology 2 4%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 18 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 17 December 2020.
All research outputs
#7,050,597
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#346
of 1,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,797
of 341,606 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#12
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 341,606 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 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 61% of its contemporaries.