ArticleNeurocritical care2016
Cerebral Critical Closing Pressure: Is the Multiparameter Model Better Suited to Estimate Physiology of Cerebral Hemodynamics?
Article in Neurocritical care, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Critical closing pressure as a new hemodynamic marker of cerebral small vessel diseases burden.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Article
- CSF Dynamics for Shunt Prognostication and Revision in Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Cerebral Blood Flow in Low Intracranial Pressure Headaches-What is Known?Brain sciences · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCerebral critical closing pressure (CrCP) is the level of arterial blood pressure (ABP) at which small brain vessels close and blood flow stops. This value is always greater than intracranial pressure (ICP). The difference between CrCP and ICP is explained by the tone of the small cerebral vessels (wall tension). CrCP value is used in several dynamic cerebral autoregulation models. However, the different methods for calculation of CrCP show frequent negative values. These findings are viewed as a methodological limitation. We intended to evaluate CrCP in patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) with a new multiparameter impedance-based model and compare it with results found earlier using a transcranial Doppler (TCD)-ABP pulse waveform-based method.
methodsTwelve severe TBI patients hospitalized during September 2005-May 2007. Ten men, mean age 32 years (16-61). Four had decompressive craniectomies (DC); three presented anisocoria. Patients were monitored with TCD cerebral blood flow velocity (FV), invasive ABP, and ICP. Data were acquired at 50 Hz with an in-house developed data acquisition system. We compared the earlier studied "first harmonic" method (M1) results with results from a new recently developed (M2) "multiparameter method."
resultsM1: In seven patients CrCP values were negative, reaching -150 mmHg. M2: All positive values; only one lower than ICP (ICP 60 mmHg/ CrCP 57 mmHg). There was a significant difference between M1 and M2 values (M1 < M2) and between ICP and M2 (M2 > ICP).
conclusionM2 results in positive values of CrCP, higher than ICP, and are physiologically interpretable.
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.