Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29072635›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of molecular sciences2017

A Systematic Review of Neuroprotective Strategies during Hypovolemia and Hemorrhagic Shock.

Marius Nistor, Wilhelm Behringer, Martin Schmidt, René Schiffner

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of molecular sciences, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. 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

4 authors.

Marius NistorDepartment of Neurology, Jena University Hospital, 07747 Jena, Germany. marius.nistor@med.uni-jena.de.
Wilhelm BehringerEmergency Department, Jena University Hospital, 07747 Jena, Germany. wilhelm.behringer@med.uni-jena.de.
Martin SchmidtInstitute for Biochemistry II, Jena University Hospital, 07747 Jena, Germany. Martin.Schmidt@med.uni-jena.de.ORCID 0000-0003-3578-4338
René SchiffnerDepartment of Neurology, Jena University Hospital, 07747 Jena, Germany. rene.schiffner@med.uni-jena.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Severe trauma constitutes a major cause of death and disability, especially in younger patients. The cerebral autoregulatory capacity only protects the brain to a certain extent in states of hypovolemia; thereafter, neurological deficits and apoptosis occurs. We therefore set out to investigate neuroprotective strategies during haemorrhagic shock. This review was performed in accordance to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Before the start of the search, a review protocol was entered into the PROSPERO database. A systematic literature search of Pubmed, Web of Science and CENTRAL was performed in August 2017. Results were screened and evaluated by two researchers based on a previously prepared inclusion protocol. Risk of bias was determined by use of SYRCLE's risk of bias tool. The retrieved results were qualitatively analysed. Of 9093 results, 119 were assessed in full-text form, 16 of them ultimately adhered to the inclusion criteria and were qualitatively analyzed. We identified three subsets of results: (1) hypothermia; (2) fluid therapy and/or vasopressors; and (3) other neuroprotective strategies (piracetam, NHE1-inhibition, aprotinin, human mesenchymal stem cells, remote ischemic preconditioning and sevoflurane). Overall, risk of bias according to SYRCLE's tool was medium; generally, animal experimental models require more rigorous adherence to the reporting of bias-free study design (randomization, etc.). While the individual study results are promising, the retrieved neuroprotective strategies have to be evaluated within the current scientific context-by doing so, it becomes clear that specific promising neuroprotective strategies during states of haemorrhagic shock remain sparse. This important topic therefore requires more in-depth research.

Indexed as

AnimalsEpinephrineFluid TherapyHumansHypothermia, InducedHypovolemiaIschemic PreconditioningMesenchymal Stem Cell TransplantationResuscitationShock, HemorrhagicTreatment OutcomeVasopressinsEpinephrineVasopressinsbleedingbrain damagehaemorrhagehypovolemianeuroprotectionneuroprotective strategiesresuscitationshock

Identifiers

PMID29072635
PMCPMC5713217

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.