Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30406745›Full record

ReviewDeutsches Arzteblatt international2018

The Relevance of Irreversible Loss of Brain Function as a Reliable Sign of Death.

Stephan A Brandt, Heinz Angstwurm, Working Group "The relevance of irreversible loss of brain function as a reliable sign of death" of the Scientific Advisory Board within the German Medical Association

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. [Legal report].Rechtsmedizin (Berlin, Germany) · 2022
    Article
  3. Brain beats heart: a cross-cultural reflection.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2021
    Article
  4. [Brain death criterion and organ donation: current neuroscientific perspective].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2020
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Spiritual Issues Should Be Considered.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2019
    Article
  7. In Reply.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2019
    Article
  8. Pertinent Points Need to Be More Convincingly Stated.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2019
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Metaphysical and Cultural Aspects.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2019
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Stephan A Brandt*on behalf of the working group "The relevance of irreversible loss of brain function as a reliable sign of death" of the Scientific Advisory Board within the German Medical Association; for a detailed list of collaborators see Box 3 at the end of this article; Department of Neurology With Experimental Neurology, Campus Charité Mitte, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin; Department of Neurology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich.
Heinz Angstwurm*on behalf of the working group "The relevance of irreversible loss of brain function as a reliable sign of death" of the Scientific Advisory Board within the German Medical Association; for a detailed list of collaborators see Box 3 at the end of this article; Department of Neurology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich.
Working Group "The relevance of irreversible loss of brain function as a reliable sign of death" of the Scientific Advisory Board within the German Medical Association

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is an ongoing need for clear explanation of the diagnostic entity called "irreversible loss of brain function" (ILBF), as the absolute reliability of this diagnosis and its significance continue to be widely misunderstood. The determination of death as an objective medical-scientific matter is often not clearly distinguished from various other aspects of death, such as its metaphysical and cultural aspects and the ways in which the living deal with the dead.

methodsThis review is based on articles retrieved by a selective literature search in the PubMed database and on guidelines and standardized diagnostic protocols from Germany and abroad.

resultsILBF can be caused by brain ischemia or anoxia or by any other type of brain disease or injury leading to an elevation of the intracranial pressure above the blood pressure and thereby to an arrest of the cerebral circulation. All situations in which brain function is merely reduced but not abolished, or only temporarily but not permanently abolished, can be clearly differentiated from ILBF through the use of standard diagnostic procedures as recommended in the relevant guidelines. Biological features that are common to all human beings underlie the medical criteria for the determination of death. The most important elements of the determination of death are irreversibility of the loss of brain function, loss of integration of bodily functions into a single living being, and loss of ability for any self-reflection or any independent interaction with the environment.

conclusionILBF is a reliable sign that a human being is dead. There has never been even one known case of incorrect determination of ILBF after proper application of the standardized diagnostic procedures that are set down in the guideline according to §16 of the German Transplantation Law.

Indexed as

JurisprudenceBrain DeathGermanyHumansReproducibility of ResultsTissue and Organ Procurement

Identifiers

PMID30406745
PMCPMC6241146

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.