Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35606562›Full record

Observational studyNeurocritical care2022

Can Quantitative Pupillometry be used to Screen for Elevated Intracranial Pressure? A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Jakob Pansell, Robert Hack, Peter Rudberg, Max Bell, Charith Cooray

Open access · hybridAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Neurocritical care, 2022. 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
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Application of Pupillometry in Neurocritical Patients.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jakob PansellDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Central Intensive Care Unit E5:67, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, 17176, Sweden. jakob.pansell@regionstockholm.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6665-0589
Robert HackDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Central Intensive Care Unit E5:67, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, 17176, Sweden.
Peter RudbergDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Central Intensive Care Unit E5:67, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, 17176, Sweden.
Max BellDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Central Intensive Care Unit E5:67, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, 17176, Sweden.
Charith CoorayDepartment of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Central Intensive Care Unit E5:67, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, 17176, Sweden.
Karolinska University Hospital · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundElevated intracranial pressure (ICP) is a serious complication in brain injury. Because of the risks involved, ICP is not monitored in all patients at risk. Noninvasive screening tools to identify patients with elevated ICP are needed. Anisocoria, abnormal pupillary size, and abnormal pupillary light reflex are signs of high ICP, but manual pupillometry is arbitrary and subject to interrater variability. We have evaluated quantitative pupillometry as a screening tool for elevated ICP.

methodsWe performed a retrospective observational study of the association between Neurological Pupil index (NPi), measured with the Neuroptics NPi-200 pupillometer, and ICP in patients routinely monitored with invasive ICP measurement in the intensive care unit. We performed a nonparametric receiver operator curve analysis for ICP ≥ 20 mm Hg with NPi as a classification variable. We performed a Youden analysis for the optimal NPi cutoff value and recorded sensitivity and specificity for this cutoff value. We also performed a logistic regression with elevated ICP as the dependent variable and NPi as the independent variable.

resultsWe included 65 patients with invasive ICP monitoring. A total of 2,705 measurements were analyzed. Using NPi as a screening tool for elevated ICP yielded an area under receiver operator curve of 0.72. The optimal mean NPi cutoff value to rule out elevated ICP was ≥ 3.9. The probability of elevated ICP decreased with increasing NPi, with an odds ratio of 0.55 (0.50, 0.61).

conclusionsScreening with NPi may inform high stakes clinical decisions by ruling out elevated ICP with a high degree of certainty. It may also aid in estimating probabilities of elevated ICP. This can help to weigh the risks of initiating invasive ICP monitoring against the risks of not doing so. Because of its ease of use and excellent interrater reliability, we suggest further studies of NPi as a screening tool for elevated ICP.

Indexed as

Intracranial HypertensionReflex, PupillaryHumansIntracranial PressurePupilReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesBrain edemaBrain injuriesCardiac arrestCerebral edemaCritical careIntensive careIntracranial pressureNeurologyNeurosurgeryQuantitative pupillometryStroke

Identifiers

PMID35606562
PMCPMC9519702
OpenAlexW4281381381

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.