↓ Skip to main content

Viral-Reactivated Pneumonia during Mechanical Ventilation: Is There Need for Antiviral Treatment?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pharmacology, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Viral-Reactivated Pneumonia during Mechanical Ventilation: Is There Need for Antiviral Treatment?
Published in
Frontiers in Pharmacology, January 2011
DOI 10.3389/fphar.2011.00066
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alejandra López-Giraldo, Salvador Sialer, Mariano Esperatti, Antoni Torres

Abstract

Respiratory viruses are not a common cause of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). Herpesviridae [Herpes simplex virus (HSV) and cytomegalovirus (CMV)] are detected frequently in the lower respiratory tract of ventilated patients. HSV is detected between days 7 and 14 of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV); presence of the virus does not necessarily imply pathogenicity, but the association with adverse clinical outcomes supports the hypothesis of a pathogenic role in a variable percentage of patients. Bronchopneumonitis associated with HSV should be considered in patients with prolonged IMV, reactivation with herpetic mucocutaneous lesions and those belonging to a risk population with burn injuries or acute lung injury. Reactivation of CMV is common in critically ill patients and usually occurs between days 14 and 21 in patients with defined risk factors. The potential pathogenic role of CMV seems clear in patients with acute lung injury and persistent respiratory failure in whom there is no isolation of bacterial agent as a cause of VAP. The best diagnostic test is not defined although lung biopsies should be considered in addition to the usual methods before starting specific treatment. The role of mimivirus is uncertain and is yet to be defined, but the serologic evidence of this new virus in the context of VAP appears to be associated with adverse clinical outcomes.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 4%
Russia 1 4%
Unknown 26 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 18%
Student > Postgraduate 3 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Other 6 21%
Unknown 7 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 29%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 18%
Unspecified 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 25%
Attention Score in Context

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 18 June 2023.
All research outputs
#19,203,583
of 24,452,844 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#7,942
of 18,439 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,090
of 188,831 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#34
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,452,844 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 18,439 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 188,831 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.