Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33048902›Full record

ArticleCritical care medicine2020

A Prospective Study of Optic Nerve Ultrasound for the Detection of Elevated Intracranial Pressure in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

Deepak Agrawal, Krishnan Raghavendran, Lili Zhao, Venkatakrishna Rajajee

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. POCUS, how can we include the brain? An overview.Journal of anesthesia, analgesia and critical care · 2022
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Deepak AgrawalDepartment of Neurosurgery, JPN Apex Trauma Centre and Neurosciences Centre, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi, India.
Krishnan RaghavendranDepartment of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Lili ZhaoDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Venkatakrishna RajajeeDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
University of Michigan–Ann Arbor · US

Funding

Optic nerve ultrasound in severe traumatic brain injuryR03EB019352 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI RAGHAVENDRAN, KRISHNAN, RAJAJEE, VENKATAKRISHNA · 2015 to 2016
$233k
NIBIB NIH HHS R03 EB019352
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIntracranial pressure monitoring plays a critical role in the management of severe traumatic brain injury. Our objective was to evaluate the accuracy of optic nerve sheath diameter as a noninvasive screening test for the detection of elevated intracranial pressure and prediction of intracranial pressure treatment intensity.

designProspective, blinded study of diagnostic accuracy.

settingNeurotrauma ICU. SUBJECTS: Consecutive patients with severe traumatic brain injury.

interventionsOptic nerve ultrasound was performed daily and optic nerve ultrasound measured at the point-of-care as well as remotely by an expert blinded to all patient details. Optic disc elevation was also measured. The index test was the highest remote-expert optic nerve ultrasound for the admission. The reference standard was the concurrent invasive intracranial pressure, with test-positivity set at intracranial pressure greater than 22 mm Hg. A priori the minimally acceptable sensitivity threshold was 90% with corresponding specificity 60%. We also evaluated the ability of optic nerve ultrasound to predict a therapeutic intensity level greater than 10. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN

resultsOne hundred twenty patients were enrolled. The intraclass correlation coefficient between point of care and expert optic nerve sheath diameter after enrollment of 50 subjects was poor at 0.16 (-0.08 to 0.41) but improved to 0.87 (0.81-0.92) for the remaining subjects after remedial training. The area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic curve of the highest expert-measured optic nerve sheath diameter to detect intracranial pressure greater than 22 mm Hg was 0.81 (0.73-0.87); area under the curve for prediction of therapeutic intensity level greater than 10 was 0.51 (0.42-0.60). Optic nerve sheath diameter greater than 0.72 demonstrated sensitivity 82% (48-98%) and specificity 79% (70-86%) for intracranial pressure greater than 22 mm Hg. The area under the curve of highest measured optic disc elevation to detect intracranial pressure greater than 22 mm Hg was 0.84 (0.76-0.90). Optic disc elevation greater than 0.04 cm attained sensitivity 90% (56-100%) and specificity 71% (61-79%).

conclusionsWhile optic nerve sheath diameter demonstrated a modest, statistically significant correlation with intracranial pressure, a predetermined level of diagnostic accuracy to justify routine clinical use as a screening test was not achieved. Measurement of optic disc elevation appears promising for the detection of elevated intracranial pressure, however, verification from larger studies is necessary.

Indexed as

AdultBrain Injuries, TraumaticFemaleHumansIntracranial HypertensionMaleMiddle AgedOptic NerveProspective StudiesReference StandardsSensitivity and SpecificityUltrasonographyYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID33048902
PMCPMC7708401
OpenAlexW3092100046

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.