Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25387992›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2014

Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for acute ischaemic stroke.

Michael H Bennett, Stephanie Weibel, Jason Wasiak, Alexander Schnabel, Christopher French, Peter Kranke

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 121 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Hyperoxia and acute brain injury.Critical care (London, England) · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Visualization and Bibliometric Analysis of Research Trends on Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy in acute stroke: is it time for Justitia to open her eyes?Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2020
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Michael H Bennett
Stephanie Weibel
Jason Wasiak
Alexander Schnabel
Christopher French
Peter Kranke
University of Würzburg · DEEpworth Hospital · AUPrince of Wales Hospital · AUUniversity of Melbourne · AU

Funding

Chief Scientist Office CZB/4/784
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Most cases of stroke are caused by impairment of blood flow to the brain (ischaemia), which results in a reduction in available oxygen and subsequent cell death. It has been postulated that hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) may reduce the volume of brain that will die by greatly increasing available oxygen, and it may further improve outcomes by reducing brain swelling. Some centres are using HBOT routinely to treat people with stroke. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2005.Objectives To assess the effectiveness and safety of adjunctive HBOT in the treatment of people with acute ischaemic stroke.Search methods We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched April 2014), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials(CENTRAL) (April 2014), MEDLINE (1966 to April 2014), EMBASE (1980 to April 2014), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (1982 to April 2014), the Database of Randomised Controlled Trials in Hyperbaric Medicine(DORCTIHM) (searched April 2014) and the reference lists of articles.We handsearched relevant publications and contacted researchers to identify additional published and unpublished studies.Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effects of adjunctive HBOT versus those of no HBOT (no treatment or sham).Data collection and analysis Three review authors independently extracted data, assessed each trial for internal validity and resolved differences by discussion.Main results We included 11 RCTs involving 705 participants. The methodological quality of the trials varied. We could pool data only for case fatalities. No significant differences were noted in the case fatality rate at six months in those receiving HBOT compared with the control group (risk ratio (RR) 0.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34 to 2.75, P value 0.96). Four of 14 scale measures of disability and functional performance indicated improvement following HBOT, for example, the mean Trouillas Disability Scale score was lower with HBOT (mean difference (MD) 2.2 point reduction with HBOT, 95% CI 0.15 to 4.3, P value 0.04), and the mean Orgogozo Scale score was higher (MD 27.9 points, 95% CI 4.0 to 51.8, P value 0.02).Authors' conclusions We found no good evidence to show that HBOT improves clinical outcomes when applied during acute presentation of ischaemic stroke. Although evidence from the 11 RCTs is insufficient to provide clear guidelines for practice, the possibility of clinical benefit has not been excluded. Further research is required to better define the role of HBOT in this condition.

Indexed as

Hyperbaric OxygenationBrain IschemiaFemaleHumansMaleRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicStroke

Identifiers

PMID25387992
PMCPMC10754477
OpenAlexW1919621793

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.