Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29397452›Full record

ReviewCurrent treatment options in neurology2018

Update on the Treatment of Spontaneous Intraparenchymal Hemorrhage: Medical and Interventional Management.

Thomas J Cusack, J Ricardo Carhuapoma, Wendy C Ziai

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current treatment options in neurology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
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

3 authors.

Thomas J CusackDivision of Neurosciences Critical Care, Departments of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Anesthesiology/Critical Care Medicine, The Johns Hopkins Hospital, 1800 Orleans Street/Phipps 455, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA.
J Ricardo CarhuapomaDivision of Neurosciences Critical Care, Departments of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Anesthesiology/Critical Care Medicine, The Johns Hopkins Hospital, 1800 Orleans Street/Phipps 455, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA.
Wendy C ZiaiDivision of Neurosciences Critical Care, Departments of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Anesthesiology/Critical Care Medicine, The Johns Hopkins Hospital, 1800 Orleans Street/Phipps 455, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA. weziai@jhmi.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewSpontaneous intraparenchymal hemorrhage (IPH) is a prominent challenge faced globally by neurosurgeons, neurologists, and intensivists. Over the past few decades, basic and clinical research efforts have been undertaken with the goal of delineating biologically and evidence-based practices aimed at decreasing mortality and optimizing the likelihood of meaningful functional outcome for patients afflicted with this devastating condition. Here, the authors review the medical and surgical approaches available for the treatment of spontaneous intraparenchymal hemorrhage, identifying areas of recent progress and ongoing research to delineate the scope and scale of IPH as it is currently understood and treated. RECENT

findingsThe approaches to IPH have broadly focused on arresting expansion of hemorrhage using a number of approaches. Recent trials have addressed the effectiveness of rapid blood pressure lowering in hypertensive patients with IPH, with rapid lowering demonstrated to be safe and at least partially effective in preventing hematoma expansion. Hemostatic therapy with platelet transfusion in patients on anti-platelet medications has been recently demonstrated to have no benefit and may be harmful. Hemostasis with administration of clotting complexes has not been shown to be effective in reducing hematoma expansion or improving outcomes although correcting these abnormalities as soon as possible remains good practice until further data are available. Stereotactically guided drainage of IPH with intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) has been shown to be safe and to improve outcomes. Research on new stereotactic surgical methods has begun to show promise. Patients with IPH should have rapid and accurate diagnosis with neuroimaging with computed tomography (CT) and computed tomography angiography (CTA). Early interventions should include control of hypertension to a systolic BP in the range of 140 mmHg for small hemorrhages without intracranial hypertension with beta blockers or calcium channel blockers, correction of any coagulopathy if present, and assessment of the need for surgical intervention. IPH and FUNC (Functional Outcome in Patients with Primary Intracerebral Hemorrhage) scores should be assessed. Patients should be dispositioned to a dedicated neurologic ICU if available. Patients should be monitored for seizures and intracranial pressure issues. Select patients, particularly those with intraventricular extension, may benefit from evacuation of hematoma with a ventriculostomy or stereotactically guided catheter. Once stabilized, patients should be reassessed with CT imaging and receive ongoing management of blood pressure, cerebral edema, ICP issues, and seizures as they arise. The goal of care for most patients is to regain capacity to receive multidisciplinary rehabilitation to optimize functional outcome.

Indexed as

Hematoma evacuationICHIntracerebral hemorrhageIntraparenchymal hemorrhageIntraventricular hemorrhageIPHIVHSurgical management of intracranial hemorrhage

Identifiers

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.