Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36434203›Full record

ReviewPediatric research2023

Neuromonitoring in neonatal critical care part II: extremely premature infants and critically ill neonates.

Mohamed El-Dib, Nicholas S Abend, Topun Austin, Geraldine Boylan, Valerie Chock, M Roberta Cilio, Gorm Greisen, Lena Hellström-Westas, Petra Lemmers, Adelina Pellicer and 7 more

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Pediatric research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. [Amplitude-integrated electroencephalography monitoring results of hospitalized neonates in plateau areas].Zhongguo dang dai er ke za zhi = Chinese journal of contemporary pediatrics · 2024
    Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

17 authors at 20 institutions in 11 countries.

Mohamed El-DibDepartment of Pediatric Newborn Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. mel-dib@bwh.harvard.edu.
Nicholas S AbendDepartments of Neurology and Pediatrics, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Topun AustinDepartment of Paediatrics, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Geraldine BoylanINFANT Research Centre & Department of Paediatrics & Child Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Valerie ChockDivision of Neonatal and Developmental Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
M Roberta CilioDepartment of Pediatrics, Division of Pediatric Neurology, Cliniques universitaires Saint-Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
Gorm GreisenDepartment of Neonatology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital & Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Lena Hellström-WestasDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University and Division of Neonatology, Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden.
Petra LemmersDepartment of Neonatology, Wilhelmina Children's Hospital, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Adelina PellicerDepartment of Neonatology, La Paz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain; Neonatology Group, IdiPAZ, Madrid, Spain.
Ronit M PresslerDepartment of Clinical Neurophysiology, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Trust, and Clinical Neuroscience, UCL- Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, UK.
Arnold SansevereDepartment of Neurology and Pediatrics, George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences; Children's National Hospital Division of Neurophysiology, Epilepsy and Critical Care, Washington, DC, USA.
Eniko SzakmarDivision of Neonatology, 1st Department of Pediatrics, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Tammy TsuchidaDepartment of Neurology and Pediatrics, George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences; Children's National Hospital Division of Neurophysiology, Epilepsy and Critical Care, Washington, DC, USA.
Sampsa VanhataloDepartment of Clinical Neurophysiology, Children's Hospital, BABA Center, Neuroscience Center/HILIFE, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Courtney J WusthoffDivision of Child Neurology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Newborn Brain Society Guidelines and Publications Committee
Stanford University · USGeorge Washington University · USHospital for Sick Children · CABrigham and Women's Hospital · USChildren's Hospital of Philadelphia · USChildren's National · USCleveland Clinic · USCliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc · BEDuke University · USGreat Ormond Street Hospital · GBHelsinki University Hospital · FIHospital Universitario La Paz · ESInfant · IELurie Children's Hospital · USMcGill University · CARigshospitalet · DKSemmelweis University · HUUniversity Medical Center Utrecht · NLUniversity of California, San Francisco · USUniversity of Cambridge · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neonatal intensive care has expanded from cardiorespiratory care to a holistic approach emphasizing brain health. To best understand and monitor brain function and physiology in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), the most commonly used tools are amplitude-integrated EEG, full multichannel continuous EEG, and near-infrared spectroscopy. Each of these modalities has unique characteristics and functions. While some of these tools have been the subject of expert consensus statements or guidelines, there is no overarching agreement on the optimal approach to neuromonitoring in the NICU. This work reviews current evidence to assist decision making for the best utilization of these neuromonitoring tools to promote neuroprotective care in extremely premature infants and in critically ill neonates. Neuromonitoring approaches in neonatal encephalopathy and neonates with possible seizures are discussed separately in the companion paper. IMPACT: For extremely premature infants, NIRS monitoring has a potential role in individualized brain-oriented care, and selective use of aEEG and cEEG can assist in seizure detection and prognostication. For critically ill neonates, NIRS can monitor cerebral perfusion, oxygen delivery, and extraction associated with disease processes as well as respiratory and hypodynamic management. Selective use of aEEG and cEEG is important in those with a high risk of seizures and brain injury. Continuous multimodal monitoring as well as monitoring of sleep, sleep-wake cycling, and autonomic nervous system have a promising role in neonatal neurocritical care.

Indexed as

Brain InjuriesInfant, Extremely PrematureCritical IllnessElectroencephalographyHumansInfantInfant, NewbornIntensive Care, NeonatalSeizures

Identifiers

PMID36434203
OpenAlexW4310059897

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.