Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29282104›Full record

SynthesisCritical care (London, England)2017

Association between continuous hyperosmolar therapy and survival in patients with traumatic brain injury - a multicentre prospective cohort study and systematic review.

Karim Asehnoune, Sigismond Lasocki, Philippe Seguin, Thomas Geeraerts, Pierre François Perrigault, Claire Dahyot-Fizelier, Catherine Paugam Burtz, Fabrice Cook, Dominique Demeure Dit Latte, Raphael Cinotti and 8 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudySystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Critical care (London, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 64 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Guideline
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Managing Intracranial Pressure Crisis.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

18 authors at 12 institutions in 2 countries.

Karim AsehnouneIntensive Care Unit, Anaesthesia and Critical Care Department, Hôtel Dieu - HME, CHU Nantes, Nantes, France. karim.asehnoune@chu-nantes.Fr.
Sigismond LasockiDepartment of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care Department, University Hospital of Angers, Angers, France.
Philippe SeguinIntensive Care Unit, Anaesthesia and Critical Care Department, Pontchaillou, University Hospital of Rennes, Rennes, France.
Thomas GeeraertsAnaesthesia and Critical Care Department, University Hospital of Toulouse, Toulouse, France.
Pierre François PerrigaultIntensive Care Unit, Anaesthesia and Critical Care Department, Gui Chauliac University Hospital of Montpellier, Montpellier, France.
Claire Dahyot-FizelierNeuro-Intensive Care Unit, Anaesthesia and Critical Care Department, Poitiers, University Hospital of Poitiers, Poitiers, France.
Catherine Paugam BurtzIntensive Care Unit, Anaesthesia and Critical Care Department, Beaujon, University Hospital of Beaujon (AP-HP), Beaujon, France.
Fabrice CookIntensive Care Unit, Anaesthesia and Critical Care Department, Henri Mondor, University Hospital of Créteil (AP-HP), Créteil, France.
Dominique Demeure Dit LatteIntensive Care Unit, Anaesthesia and Critical Care Department, Hôtel Dieu - HME, CHU Nantes, Nantes, France.
Raphael CinottiIntensive Care Unit, Anaesthesia and Critical Care Department, Hôtel Dieu - HME, CHU Nantes, Nantes, France.
Pierre Joachim MaheIntensive Care Unit, Anaesthesia and Critical Care Department, Hôtel Dieu - HME, CHU Nantes, Nantes, France.
Camille FortuitIntensive Care Unit, Anaesthesia and Critical Care Department, Hôtel Dieu - HME, CHU Nantes, Nantes, France.
Romain PirracchioDepartment of Anesthesia and Critical care Medicine, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris 5 Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France.
Fanny FeuilletUMR 1246 SPHERE "methodS in Patients-centered outcomes and HEalth ResEarch", Nantes University, Nantes, France.
Véronique SébilleUMR 1246 SPHERE "methodS in Patients-centered outcomes and HEalth ResEarch", Nantes University, Nantes, France.
Antoine RoquillyIntensive Care Unit, Anaesthesia and Critical Care Department, Hôtel Dieu - HME, CHU Nantes, Nantes, France.
ATLANREA group
COBI group
Hotel Dieu Hospital · CACentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire d'Angers · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Montpellier · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Tours · FRDélégation Paris 5 · FRHôpital Beaujon · FRHôpital Pontchaillou · FRUniversité de Poitiers · FRUniversité Fédérale de Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées · FRUniversité Paris-Est Créteil · FR

Funding

Association les Gueules Cassées 2013Société Française d'Anesthésie Réanimation Bourse Recherche 2011
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntracranial hypertension (ICH) is a major cause of death after traumatic brain injury (TBI). Continuous hyperosmolar therapy (CHT) has been proposed for the treatment of ICH, but its effectiveness is controversial. We compared the mortality and outcomes in patients with TBI with ICH treated or not with CHT.

methodsWe included patients with TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale ≤ 12 and trauma-associated lesion on brain computed tomography (CT) scan) from the databases of the prospective multicentre trials Corti-TC, BI-VILI and ATLANREA. CHT consisted of an intravenous infusion of NaCl 20% for 24 hours or more. The primary outcome was the risk of survival at day 90, adjusted for predefined covariates and baseline differences, allowing us to reduce the bias resulting from confounding factors in observational studies. A systematic review was conducted including studies published from 1966 to December 2016.

resultsAmong the 1086 included patients, 545 (51.7%) developed ICH (143 treated and 402 not treated with CHT). In patients with ICH, the relative risk of survival at day 90 with CHT was 1.43 (95% CI, 0.99-2.06, p = 0.05). The adjusted hazard ratio for survival was 1.74 (95% CI, 1.36-2.23, p < 0.001) in propensity-score-adjusted analysis. At day 90, favourable outcomes (Glasgow Outcome Scale 4-5) occurred in 45.2% of treated patients with ICH and in 35.8% of patients with ICH not treated with CHT (p = 0.06). A review of the literature including 1304 patients from eight studies suggests that CHT is associated with a reduction of in-ICU mortality (intervention, 112/474 deaths (23.6%) vs. control, 244/781 deaths (31.2%); OR 1.42 (95% CI, 1.04-1.95), p = 0.03, I

conclusionsCHT for the treatment of posttraumatic ICH was associated with improved adjusted 90-day survival. This result was strengthened by a review of the literature.

Indexed as

Brain Injuries, TraumaticIntracranial HypertensionSaline Solution, HypertonicAdultCohort StudiesFemaleGlasgow Coma ScaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPropensity ScoreProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesSurvival AnalysisTomography, X-Ray ComputedSaline Solution, HypertonicBrain oedemaHyperosmolar therapyHypertonicIntracranial hypertensionSaline solutionSodiumTraumaTraumatic brain injury

Identifiers

PMID29282104
PMCPMC5745762
OpenAlexW2778790886

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.