Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26342642›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2016

Intraoperative non invasive intracranial pressure monitoring during pneumoperitoneum: a case report and a review of the published cases and case report series.

C Robba, S Bacigaluppi, D Cardim, J Donnelly, M S Sekhon, M J Aries, G Mancardi, A Booth, N L Bragazzi, M Czosnyka and 1 more

Abstract readCase ReportsReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review 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 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Non-Invasive Intracranial Pressure Monitoring.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

11 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

C RobbaNeurosciences Critical Care Unit, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Box 1, Hills Road, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK. kiarobba@gmail.com.
S BacigaluppiBrain Physics Lab, Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
D CardimDepartment of Neurosurgery, Galliera Hospital, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
J DonnellyDepartment of Neurosurgery, Galliera Hospital, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
M S SekhonDepartment of Medicine, Division of Critical Care Medicine, Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, Canada.
M J AriesDepartment of Critical Care, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
G MancardiSection of Neurology, Department of Neuroscience, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetics, Maternal and Child Health (DINOGMI), University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
A BoothNeurosciences Critical Care Unit, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Box 1, Hills Road, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK.
N L BragazziDepartment of Health Sciences (DISSAL), School of Public Health, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
M CzosnykaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Galliera Hospital, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy.
B MattaNeurosciences Critical Care Unit, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Box 1, Hills Road, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK.
University of Genoa · ITCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Groningen · NLVancouver General Hospital · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Non-invasive measurement of ICP (nICP) can be warranted in patients at risk for developing increased ICP during pneumoperitoneum (PP). Our aim was to assess available data on the application of nICP monitoring during these procedures and to present a patient assessed with an innovative combination of noninvasive tools. Literature review of nICP assessment during PP did not find any studies comparing different methods intraprocedurally and only few studies of any nICP monitoring were available: transcranial Doppler (TCD) studies used the pulsatility index (PI) as an estimator of ICP and failed to detect a significant ICP increase during PP, whereas two out of three optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD) studies detected a statistically significant ICP increase. In the case study, we describe a 52 year old man with a high grade thalamic glioma who underwent urgent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Considering the high intraoperative risk of developing intracranial hypertension, he was monitored through parallel ONSD ultrasound measurement and TCD derived formulae (flow velocity diastolic formula, FVdnICP, and PI). ONSD and FVdnICP methods indicated a significant ICP increase during PP, whereas PI was not significantly increased. Our experience, combined with the literature review, seems to suggest that PI might not detect ICP changes in this context, however we indicate a possible interest of nICP monitoring during PP by means of ONSD and of TCD derived FVdNICP, especially for patients at risk for increased ICP.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBrain MappingHumansIntracranial HypertensionIntracranial PressureMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedMonitoring, IntraoperativeMonitoring, PhysiologicOptic NervePneumoperitoneumProspective StudiesSignal Processing, Computer-AssistedUltrasonography, Doppler, TranscranialIntraoperative monitoringNon invasive intracranial pressureOptic nerve sheet diameterPneumoperitonaeum

Identifiers

PMID26342642
OpenAlexW1794142311

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.