ArticleNeurocritical care2023
Comparison of Cerebral Autoregulation Above and Below the Tentorium of the Cerebellum In Neurosurgical Patients with Transtentorial ICP Gradient.
Article in Neurocritical care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cardiac output-guided vs. mean arterial pressure-guided hemodynamic management in craniotomy patients with cardiovascular disease: a randomized trial.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- Intracranial pressure physiology, monitoring and individualized management in the acute brain injured patient.Intensive care medicine · 2026Review
- Temporal dynamics of ICP, PRx, CPP, and CPPopt in relation to functional outcome in spontaneous cerebellar hemorrhage.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Article
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 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionCerebral autoregulation is an essential mechanism for maintaining cerebral blood flow stability. The phenomenon of transtentorial intracranial pressure (ICP) gradient after neurosurgical operations, complicated by edema and intracranial hypertension in the posterior fossa, has been described in clinical practice but is still underinvestigated. The aim of the study was to compare autoregulation coefficients (i.e., pressure reactivity index [PRx]) in two compartments (infratentorial and supratentorial) during the ICP gradient phenomenon.
methodsThree male patients, aged 24 years, 32 years, and 59 years, respectively, were involved in the study after posterior fossa surgery. Arterial blood pressure and ICP were invasively monitored. Infratentorial ICP was measured in the cerebellar parenchyma. Supratentorial ICP was measured either in the parenchyma of the cerebral hemispheres or through the external ventricular drainage. Cerebral autoregulation was evaluated by the PRx coefficient (ICM + , Cambridge, UK).
resultsIn all patients, ICP was higher in the posterior fossa, and the transtentorial ICP gradient in each patient was 5 ± 1.6 mm Hg, 8.5 ± 4.4 mm Hg, and 7.7 ± 2.2 mm Hg, respectively. ICP in the infratentorial space was 17 ± 4 mm Hg, 18 ± 4.4 mm Hg, and 20 ± 4 mm Hg, respectively. PRx values in the supratentorial and infratentorial spaces had the smallest difference (- 0.01, 0.02, and 0.01, respectively), and the limits of precision were 0.1, 0.2, and 0.1 in the first, second, and third patients, respectively. The correlation coefficient between the PRx values in the supratentorial and infratentorial spaces for each patient was 0.98, 0.95, and 0.97, respectively.
conclusionsA high degree of correlation was established between the autoregulation coefficient PRx in two compartments in the presence of transtentorial ICP gradient and persistent intracranial hypertension in the posterior fossa. Cerebral autoregulation, according to the PRx coefficient in both spaces, was similar.
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.