SynthesisNeurocritical care2025
Elevated Blood Pressure and Culprit Aneurysm Rebleeding During the Unsecured Period of Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Neurocritical care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage, rebleeding prior to securing the culprit aneurysm leads to significant morbidity and mortality. Elevated blood pressure has been identified as a possible risk factor. In this systematic review, we evaluated the association between elevated blood pressure and aneurysm rebleeding during the unsecured period. We searched MEDLINE, Embase + Embase Classic, and CENTRAL, from inception to March 8th, 2024. We included studies of adults with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage reporting at least one blood pressure measurement during the unsecured period and a measure of association with rebleeding. Results were stratified by blood pressure thresholds, effect measure, and adjustment for confounding. Separate meta-analyses were performed for each of these groups. Our search identified 5,209 citations. After screening, 15 studies were included in our review. All studies were observational in design and at moderate or high risk of bias. Meta-analysis of the unadjusted results produced mixed findings across the systolic blood pressure (SBP) thresholds: SBP > 140 mm Hg, unadjusted odds ratio (uOR) 1.03 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55-1.93; I
Indexed as
Identifiers
39402427What 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.