ArticleJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2016
Autoregulation monitoring and outcome prediction in neurocritical care patients: Does one index fit all?
Article in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Reliability and validity of the mean flow index (Mx) for assessing cerebral autoregulation in humans: A systematic review of the methodology.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2022Pooled it
- ARIMA-based forecasting of cerebral physiologic signals in acute traumatic brain injury: a CAnadian high-resolution TBI (CAHR-TBI) cohort study.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2026Article
- Mean flow index (Mxa) algorithm option can influence cerebral autoregulation classification in critically ill septic patients.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2026Article
- The association of acute and chronic phase cerebrovascular reactivity with patient reported quality of life following moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Time-domain methods for quantifying dynamic cerebral blood flow autoregulation: Review and recommendations. A white paper from the Cerebrovascular Research Network (CARNet).Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2024Review
- Myths and methodologies: Assessment of dynamic cerebral autoregulation by the mean flow index.Experimental physiology · 2024Article
- Are We Ready for Clinical Therapy based on Cerebral Autoregulation? A Pro-con Debate.Neurocritical care · 2023Article
- Diagnostic and prognostic performance of Mxa and transfer function analysis-based dynamic cerebral autoregulation metrics.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2022Article
- Reliability of cerebral autoregulation using different measures of perfusion pressure in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage.Physiological reports · 2022Article
- Transcranial Doppler Based Cerebrovascular Reactivity Indices in Adult Traumatic Brain Injury: A Scoping Review of Associations With Patient Oriented Outcomes.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Reliability, reproducibility and validity of dynamic cerebral autoregulation in a large cohort with transient ischaemic attack or minor stroke.Physiological measurement · 2020Article
- Near-infrared Spectroscopy-derived Cerebral Autoregulation Indices Independently Predict Clinical Outcome in Acutely Ill Comatose Patients.Journal of neurosurgical anesthesiology · 2020Observational
- Comparative Study of Novel Noninvasive Cerebral Autoregulation Volumetric Reactivity Indices Reflected by Ultrasonic Speed and Attenuation as Dynamic Measurements in the Human Brain.Brain sciences · 2020Article
- Glasgow Coma Scale Score Fluctuations are Inversely Associated With a NIRS-based Index of Cerebral Autoregulation in Acutely Comatose Patients.Journal of neurosurgical anesthesiology · 2019Article
- Non-invasive Cerebrovascular Autoregulation Assessment Using the Volumetric Reactivity Index: Prospective Study.Neurocritical care · 2019Article
- Journal of clinical monitoring and computing 2016 end of year summary: anesthesia.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2017Review
- The Utility of Cerebral Blood Flow Assessment in TBI.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Indexes PRx and Mx have been formerly introduced to assess cerebral autoregulation and have been shown to be associated with 3-month clinical outcome. In a mixed cohort of neurocritical care patients, we retrospectively investigated the impact of selected clinical characteristics on this association. Forty-one patients (18-77 years) with severe traumatic (TBI, N = 20) and non-traumatic (N = 21) brain injuries were studied. Cerebral blood flow velocity, arterial blood pressure and intracranial pressure were repeatedly recorded during 1-h periods. Calculated PRx and Mx were correlated with 3-month clinical outcome score of modified Rankin Scale (mRS) in different subgroups with specific clinical characteristics. Both PRx and Mx correlated significantly with outcome (PRx: r = 0.38, p < 0.05; AUC = 0.64, n.s./Mx: r = 0.48, p < 0.005; AUC = 0.80, p < 0.005) in the overall group, and in patients with hemicraniectomy (N = 17; PRx: r = 0.73, p < 0.001; AUC = 0.89, p < 0.01/Mx: r = 0.69, p < 0.005; AUC = 0.87, p < 0.05). Mx, not PRx, correlated significantly with mRS in patients with heart failure (N = 17; r = 0.69, p < 0.005; AUC = 0.92, p < 0.005), and in non-traumatic patients (r = 0.49, p < 0.05; AUC = 0.79, p < 0.05). PRx, not Mx, correlated significantly with mRS in TBI patients (r = 0.63, p < 0.01; AUC = 0.89, p < 0.01). Both indexes did not correlate with mRS in diabetes patients (N = 15), PRx failed in hypocapnic patients (N = 26). Both PRx and Mx were significantly associated with 3-month clinical outcome, even in patients with hemicraniectomy. PRx was more appropriate for TBI patients, while Mx was better suited for non-traumatic patients and patients with heart failure. Prognostic values of indexes were affected by diabetes (both Mx and PRx) and hypocapnia (PRx only).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.