Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18759980›Full record

Trial reportCritical care (London, England)2008

Pentobarbital versus thiopental in the treatment of refractory intracranial hypertension in patients with traumatic brain injury: a randomized controlled trial.

Jon Pérez-Bárcena, Juan A Llompart-Pou, Javier Homar, Josep M Abadal, Joan M Raurich, Guillem Frontera, Marta Brell, Javier Ibáñez, Jordi Ibáñez

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Critical care (London, England), 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00622570 (Comparison of Effectiveness of Pentobarbital and Thiopental in Patients With Refractory Intracranial Hypertension.), which is not on this map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT00622570 phase3terminatednot on this map

Comparison of Effectiveness of Pentobarbital and Thiopental in Patients With Refractory Intracranial Hypertension.

TypeinterventionalSponsorHospital Universitari Son DuretaRan2002 to 2007Enrolled44ConditionsTraumatic Brain InjuryArmsPentobarbital, thiopental
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 83 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Barbiturates for acute traumatic brain injury.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Deep Sedation in Traumatic Brain Injury Patients.Korean journal of neurotrauma · 2023
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jon Pérez-BárcenaIntensive Care Medicine Department, Son Dureta University Hospital, Andrea Doria 55, Palma de Mallorca, 07014, Spain. jperez@hsd.es
Juan A Llompart-Pou
Javier Homar
Josep M Abadal
Joan M Raurich
Guillem Frontera
Marta Brell
Javier Ibáñez
Jordi Ibáñez
Hospital Universitario Son Dureta · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionExperimental research has demonstrated that the level of neuroprotection conferred by the various barbiturates is not equal. Until now no controlled studies have been conducted to compare their effectiveness, even though the Brain Trauma Foundation Guidelines recommend that such studies be undertaken. The objectives of the present study were to assess the effectiveness of pentobarbital and thiopental in terms of controlling refractory intracranial hypertension in patients with severe traumatic brain injury, and to evaluate the adverse effects of treatment.

methodsThis was a prospective, randomized, cohort study comparing two treatments: pentobarbital and thiopental. Patients who had suffered a severe traumatic brain injury (Glasgow Coma Scale score after resuscitation < or = 8 points or neurological deterioration during the first week after trauma) and with refractory intracranial hypertension (intracranial pressure > 20 mmHg) first-tier measures, in accordance with the Brain Trauma Foundation Guidelines.

resultsA total of 44 patients (22 in each group) were included over a 5-year period. There were no statistically significant differences in ' baseline characteristics, except for admission computed cranial tomography characteristics, using the Traumatic Coma Data Bank classification. Uncontrollable intracranial pressure occurred in 11 patients (50%) in the thiopental treatment group and in 18 patients (82%) in the pentobarbital group (P = 0.03). Under logistic regression analysis--undertaken in an effort to adjust for the cranial tomography characteristics, which were unfavourable for pentobarbital--thiopental was more effective than pentobarbital in terms of controlling intracranial pressure (odds ratio = 5.1, 95% confidence interval 1.2 to 21.9; P = 0.027). There were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to the incidence of arterial hypotension or infection.

conclusionsThiopental appeared to be more effective than pentobarbital in controlling intracranial hypertension refractory to first-tier measures. These findings should be interpreted with caution because of the imbalance in cranial tomography characteristics and the different dosages employed in the two arms of the study. The incidence of adverse effects was similar in both groups.

trial registration(Trial registration: US Clinical Trials registry NCT00622570.).

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedBrain InjuriesCohort StudiesFemaleHumansIntracranial HypertensionMaleMiddle AgedPentobarbitalProspective StudiesThiopentalTreatment OutcomeYoung AdultPentobarbitalThiopental

Identifiers

PMID18759980
PMCPMC2575601
OpenAlexW2121546852

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.