Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37697130›Full record

ArticleNeurocritical care2024

A Solution to the Cerebral Perfusion Pressure Transducer Placement Conundrum in Neurointensive Care? The Dual Transducer.

Era Mikkonen, Jonas Blixt, Ari Ercole, Peter Alpkvist, Robert Sköldbring, Bo-Michael Bellander, Eddie Weitzberg, David W Nelson

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in Neurocritical care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Observational
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.

Era MikkonenDepartment of Perioperative Medicine and Intensive Care, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. era.mikkonen@regionstockholm.se.ORCID 0000-0003-1379-0235
Jonas BlixtDepartment of Perioperative Medicine and Intensive Care, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Ari ErcoleDivision of Anaesthesia, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Peter AlpkvistSection for Neurosurgery, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Robert SköldbringDepartment of Perioperative Medicine and Intensive Care, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Bo-Michael BellanderSection for Neurosurgery, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Eddie WeitzbergDepartment of Perioperative Medicine and Intensive Care, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
David W NelsonDepartment of Perioperative Medicine and Intensive Care, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intracranial pressure is routinely monitored in most intensive care units caring for patients with severe neurological insults and, together with continuous arterial blood pressure measurement, allows for monitoring of cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP). CPP is the driving pressure of blood flow to the brain and is used to guide therapy. However, there is considerable inconsistency in the literature regarding how CPP is technically measured and, more specifically, the appropriate placement of the arterial pressure transducer. Depending on patient positioning and where the arterial pressure transducer is placed, the mean arterial pressure used for CPP calculation can vary widely by up to 15 mm Hg, which is greater than the acceptable variation in target ranges used clinically. Physiologically, the arterial pressure transducer should be placed at the level of the foramen of Monro for CPP measurement, but it is commonly set at the level of the right atrium for systematic measurement. Mean arterial pressure measurement at the level of the right atrium can lead to overestimation and potentially critically low actual CPP levels when the head is elevated, and measurement at the level of the foramen of Monro will underestimate systemic pressures, increasing the risk of excessive and unnecessary use of vasopressors and fluid. At the Karolinska University Hospital neurointensive care unit, we have used a split dual-transducer system, measuring arterial pressure both at the level of the foramen of Monro and at the level of the right atrium from a single arterial source. In doing so, we work with constants and can monitor and target optimum arterial pressures to better secure perfusion to all organs, with potentially less risk of cerebral ischemia or overuse of vasopressors and fluids, which may affect outcome.

Indexed as

Arterial PressureCerebrovascular CirculationBlood PressureHumansIntensive Care UnitsIntracranial PressureMonitoring, PhysiologicPatient PositioningVasoconstrictor AgentsVasoconstrictor Agents1. BackgroundBrain injuryCerebrovascular monitoringCritical careIntracranial pressurePatient monitoringPressureTransducers

Identifiers

PMID37697130
PMCPMC10959835

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.