Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25208680›Full record

ReviewNeurocritical care2014

Intracranial pressure monitoring: fundamental considerations and rationale for monitoring.

Randall Chesnut, Walter Videtta, Paul Vespa, Peter Le Roux, Participants in the International Multidisciplinary Consensus Conference on Multimodality Monitoring

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Neurocritical care, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 52 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
9.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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.

NCT03257904 completednot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

International Prospective Observational StudY on iNtrAcranial PreSsurE in Intensive Care (ICU) (SynapseICU)

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of Milano BicoccaRan2018 to 2020Enrolled2,395ConditionsTraumatic Brain Injury, Subarachnoid Hemorrhage, Intracerebral HemorrhageArmsintracranial pressure monitoring
NCT04459806 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Evaluation of Intracranial Pressure Time Dose by the New Integra CereLink ICP Monitor

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of Milano BicoccaRan2023 to 2026Enrolled250ConditionsIntracranial Hypertension, Traumatic Brain Injury, Subarachnoid Hemorrhage, Intracranial HemorrhagesArmsintracranial pressure monitoring
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

52 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 139 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Routine intracranial pressure monitoring in acute coma.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Randall ChesnutBrain and Spine Center, Suite 370, Medical Science Building, Lankenau Medical Center, 100 East Lancaster Avenue, Wynnewood, PA, 19096, USA.
Walter Videtta
Paul Vespa
Peter Le Roux
Participants in the International Multidisciplinary Consensus Conference on Multimodality Monitoring
Lankenau Medical Center · USBarrow Brain and Spine · US

Funding

Department of Health NIHR-RP-R3-12-013Medical Research Council G0600986Medical Research Council G0601025Medical Research Council G1002277Medical Research Council G9439390
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a major cause of death and disability worldwide. In large part critical care for TBI is focused on the identification and management of secondary brain injury. This requires effective neuromonitoring that traditionally has centered on intracranial pressure (ICP). The purpose of this paper is to review the fundamental literature relative to the clinical application of ICP monitoring in TBI critical care and to provide recommendations on how the technique maybe applied to help patient management and enhance outcome. A PubMed search between 1980 and September 2013 identified 2,253 articles; 244 of which were reviewed in detail to prepare this report and the evidentiary tables. Several important concepts emerge from this review. ICP monitoring is safe and is best performed using a parenchymal monitor or ventricular catheter. While the indications for ICP monitoring are well established, there remains great variability in its use. Increased ICP, particularly the pattern of the increase and ICP refractory to treatment is associated with increased mortality. Class I evidence is lacking on how monitoring and management of ICP influences outcome. However, a large body of observational data suggests that ICP management has the potential to influence outcome, particularly when care is targeted and individualized and supplemented with data from other monitors including the clinical examination and imaging.

Indexed as

Critical CareNeurophysiological MonitoringBrain InjuriesHumansIntracranial PressurePatient SelectionPrognosis

Identifiers

PMID25208680
OpenAlexW2017237627

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.