ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
Value of Repeat CT Brain in Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Patients with High Risk of Intracerebral Hemorrhage Progression.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Progression of mild traumatic brain injury with intracranial hemorrhage: a retrospective study of associated factors in patients managed conservatively in the emergency department.International journal of emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Impact of Different DOACs on Complications of TBI After Low-Energy Trauma.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Consensus on the management of traumatic brain injury in older adults: Results from a Delphi study.Brain & spine · 2025Article
- Potential Neuroprotective Role of Neurotrophin in Traumatic Brain Injury.CNS & neurological disorders drug targets · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patients with mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI) with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), particularly those at higher risk of having ICH progression, are typically prescribed a second head Computer Tomography (CT) scan to monitor the disease development. This study aimed to evaluate the role of a repeat head CT in MTBI patients at a higher risk of ICH progression by comparing the intervention rate between patients with and without ICH progression.
methods192 patients with MTBI and ICH were treated between November 2019 to December 2020 at a single level II trauma center. The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) was used to classify MTBI, and initial head CT was performed according to the Canadian CT head rule. Patients with a higher risk of ICH progression, including the elderly (≥65 years old), patients on antiplatelets or anticoagulants, or patients with an initial head CT that revealed EDH, contusional bleeding, or SDH > 5 mm, and multiple ICH underwent a repeat head CT within 12 to 24 h later. Data regarding types of intervention, length of stay in the hospital, and outcome were collected. The risk of further neurological deterioration and readmission rates were compared between these two groups. All patients were followed up in the clinic after one month or contacted via phone if they did not return.
results189 patients underwent scheduled repeated head CT, 18% had radiological intracranial bleed progression, and 82% had no changes. There were no statistically significant differences in terms of intervention rate, risk of neurological deterioration in the future, or readmission between them.
conclusionRepeat head CT in mild TBI patients with no neurological deterioration is not recommended, even in patients with a higher risk of ICH progression.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.