Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36622462›Full record

Observational studyIntensive care medicine2023

Treatments for intracranial hypertension in acute brain-injured patients: grading, timing, and association with outcome. Data from the SYNAPSE-ICU study.

Chiara Robba, Francesca Graziano, Angelo Guglielmi, Paola Rebora, Stefania Galimberti, Fabio S Taccone, Giuseppe Citerio, SYNAPSE-ICU Investigators

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Intensive care medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. What Do We Do When the ICP Goes Up?Neurocritical care · 2026
    Observational
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Update on acute brain injury.Intensive care medicine · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Update on traumatic brain injury in the ICU.Current opinion in anaesthesiology · 2025
    Review
  9. Observational
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Managing Intracranial Pressure Crisis.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2024
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  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

8 authors.

Chiara RobbaAnesthesia and Intensive Care, Policlinico San Martino, IRCCS for Oncology and Neuroscience, Genoa, Italy.
Francesca GrazianoSchool of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano - Bicocca, Monza, Italy.
Angelo GuglielmiDepartment of Clinical-Surgical Diagnostic and Paediatric Sciences, Unit of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy.
Paola ReboraSchool of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano - Bicocca, Monza, Italy.
Stefania GalimbertiSchool of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano - Bicocca, Monza, Italy.
Fabio S TacconeDepartment of Intensive Care, Erasme Hospital, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Giuseppe CiterioSchool of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano - Bicocca, Monza, Italy. giuseppe.citerio@unimib.it.ORCID 0000-0002-5374-3161
SYNAPSE-ICU Investigators

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeUncertainties remain about the safety and efficacy of therapies for managing intracranial hypertension in acute brain injured (ABI) patients. This study aims to describe the therapeutical approaches used in ABI, with/without intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring, among different pathologies and across different countries, and their association with six months mortality and neurological outcome.

methodsA preplanned subanalysis of the SYNAPSE-ICU study, a multicentre, prospective, international, observational cohort study, describing the ICP treatment, graded according to Therapy Intensity Level (TIL) scale, in patients with ABI during the first week of intensive care unit (ICU) admission.

results2320 patients were included in the analysis. The median age was 55 (I-III quartiles = 39-69) years, and 800 (34.5%) were female. During the first week from ICU admission, no-basic TIL was used in 382 (16.5%) patients, mild-moderate in 1643 (70.8%), and extreme in 295 cases (eTIL, 12.7%). Patients who received eTIL were younger (median age 49 (I-III quartiles = 35-62) vs 56 (40-69) years, p < 0.001), with less cardiovascular pre-injury comorbidities (859 (44%) vs 90 (31.4%), p < 0.001), with more episodes of neuroworsening (160 (56.1%) vs 653 (33.3%), p < 0.001), and were more frequently monitored with an ICP device (221 (74.9%) vs 1037 (51.2%), p < 0.001). Considerable variability in the frequency of use and type of eTIL adopted was observed between centres and countries. At six months, patients who received no-basic TIL had an increased risk of mortality (Hazard ratio, HR = 1.612, 95% Confidence Interval, CI = 1.243-2.091, p < 0.001) compared to patients who received eTIL. No difference was observed when comparing mild-moderate TIL with eTIL (HR = 1.017, 95% CI = 0.823-1.257, p = 0.873). No significant association between the use of TIL and neurological outcome was observed.

conclusionsDuring the first week of ICU admission, therapies to control high ICP are frequently used, especially mild-moderate TIL. In selected patients, the use of aggressive strategies can have a beneficial effect on six months mortality but not on neurological outcome.

Indexed as

Brain Injuries, TraumaticIntracranial HypertensionBrainFemaleGlasgow Coma ScaleHumansIntensive Care UnitsIntracranial PressureMaleMiddle AgedMonitoring, PhysiologicProspective StudiesIntracranial haemorrhageIntracranial pressureSubarachnoid haemorrhageTherapy intensity levelTraumatic brain injury

Identifiers

PMID36622462
PMCPMC9852114

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.