{rfName}
Fe

Indexed in

License and use

Icono OpenAccess

Citations

194

Altmetrics

Article has an altmetric score of 84

Grant support

The trial was made possible thanks to an unrestricted grant from Alung Technologies Inc, Maquet (Getinge Group), and Novalung (Xenios now part of Fresenius Medical). They supported the costs of the data monitoring and site visits, the insurance fees, the supply of the equipment and materials, the shipments and the fees per patient. The grants from the companies amounted to (sic)171,000 and were made available to the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine that supported the costs of the development and running of the eCRF platform, the IT infrastructure, and the administrative costs related to legal matters and contracting (insurance contracts, data use agreements, and hospital contracts).

Analysis of institutional authors

Capelier, GillesAuthor

Share

Publications
>
Article

Feasibility and safety of extracorporeal CO2 removal to enhance protective ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome: the SUPERNOVA study

Publicated to:Intensive Care Medicine. 45 (5): 592-600 - 2019-01-01 45(5), DOI: 10.1007/s00134-019-05567-4

Authors: Combes, Alain; Fanelli, Vito; Pham, Tai; Ranieri, V. Marco; Goligher, Ewan C.; Brodie, Daniel; Pesenti, Antonio; Beale, Richard; Brochard, Laurent; Chiche, Jean-Daniel; Fan, Eddy; de Backer, Daniel; Francois, Guy; Ferguson, Niall; Laffey, John; Mercat, Alain; McAuley, Daniel F.; Mueller, Thomas; Quintel, Michael; Vincent, Jean-Louis; Taccone, Fabio Silvio; Peperstraete, Harlinde; Morimont, Philippe; Schmidt, Matthieu; Levy, Bruno; Diehl, Jean-Luc; Guervilly, Christophe; Capelier, Gilles; Vieillard-Baron, Antoine; Messika, Jonathan; Karagiannidis, Christian; Moerer, Onnen; Urbino, Rosario; Antonelli, Massimo; Mojoli, Francesco; Alessandri, Francesco; Grasselli, Giacomo; Donker, Dirk; Ferrer, Ricard; Mancebo, Jordi; Slutsky, Arthur S.;European Soc Intensive Care Med Tr; Strategy Ultra-Protective Lung Ven

Affiliations

Abstract

PurposeWe assessed feasibility and safety of extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO2R) to facilitate ultra-protective ventilation (V-T 4mL/kg and P(PLAT)25cmH(2)O) in patients with moderate acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).MethodsProspective multicenter international phase 2 study. Primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving ultra-protective ventilation with PaCO2 not increasing more than 20% from baseline, and arterial pH>7.30. Severe adverse events (SAE) and ECCO2R-related adverse events (ECCO2R-AE) were reported to an independent data and safety monitoring board. We used lower CO2 extraction and higher CO2 extraction devices (membrane lung cross-sectional area 0.59 vs. 1.30m(2); flow 300-500mL/min vs. 800-1000mL/min, respectively).ResultsNinety-five patients were enrolled. The proportion of patients who achieved ultra-protective settings by 8h and 24h was 78% (74 out of 95 patients; 95% confidence interval 68-89%) and 82% (78 out of 95 patients; 95% confidence interval 76-88%), respectively. ECCO2R was maintained for 5 [3-8]days. Six SAEs were reported; two of them were attributed to ECCO2R (brain hemorrhage and pneumothorax). ECCO2R-AEs were reported in 39% of the patients. A total of 69 patients (73%) were alive at day 28. Fifty-nine patients (62%) were alive at hospital discharge.ConclusionsUse of ECCO2R to facilitate ultra-protective ventilation was feasible. A randomized clinical trial is required to assess the overall benefits and harms.Clinicaltrials.govNCT02282657

Keywords

acute respiratory distress syndromeextracorporeal carbon dioxide removalmechanical ventilation6 ml/kgAcute respiratory distress syndromeEcco2rExtracorporeal carbon dioxide removalHypercapniaLung injuryMechanical ventilationPressureVentilator-induced lung injury

Quality index

Bibliometric impact. Analysis of the contribution and dissemination channel

The work has been published in the journal Intensive Care Medicine due to its progression and the good impact it has achieved in recent years, according to the agency WoS (JCR), it has become a reference in its field. In the year of publication of the work, 2019, it was in position 2/36, thus managing to position itself as a Q1 (Primer Cuartil), in the category Critical Care Medicine. Notably, the journal is positioned above the 90th percentile.

From a relative perspective, and based on the normalized impact indicator calculated from World Citations from Scopus Elsevier, it yields a value for the Field-Weighted Citation Impact from the Scopus agency: 9.06, which indicates that, compared to works in the same discipline and in the same year of publication, it ranks as a work cited above average. (source consulted: ESI Nov 14, 2024)

This information is reinforced by other indicators of the same type, which, although dynamic over time and dependent on the set of average global citations at the time of their calculation, consistently position the work at some point among the top 50% most cited in its field:

  • Field Citation Ratio (FCR) from Dimensions: 62.95 (source consulted: Dimensions Jun 2025)

Specifically, and according to different indexing agencies, this work has accumulated citations as of 2025-06-07, the following number of citations:

  • WoS: 2
  • Scopus: 192
  • OpenCitations: 184

Impact and social visibility

From the perspective of influence or social adoption, and based on metrics associated with mentions and interactions provided by agencies specializing in calculating the so-called "Alternative or Social Metrics," we can highlight as of 2025-06-07:

  • The use, from an academic perspective evidenced by the Altmetric agency indicator referring to aggregations made by the personal bibliographic manager Mendeley, gives us a total of: 236.
  • The use of this contribution in bookmarks, code forks, additions to favorite lists for recurrent reading, as well as general views, indicates that someone is using the publication as a basis for their current work. This may be a notable indicator of future more formal and academic citations. This claim is supported by the result of the "Capture" indicator, which yields a total of: 233 (PlumX).

With a more dissemination-oriented intent and targeting more general audiences, we can observe other more global scores such as:

  • The Total Score from Altmetric: 83.9.
  • The number of mentions on the social network Facebook: 10 (Altmetric).
  • The number of mentions on the social network X (formerly Twitter): 132 (Altmetric).

It is essential to present evidence supporting full alignment with institutional principles and guidelines on Open Science and the Conservation and Dissemination of Intellectual Heritage. A clear example of this is:

  • The work has been submitted to a journal whose editorial policy allows open Open Access publication.

Leadership analysis of institutional authors

This work has been carried out with international collaboration, specifically with researchers from: Canada; Italy.