Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39553672›Full record

ReviewHeliyon2024

An updated review for clinical and radiological predictors of acute intraparenchymal hematoma progression in cerebral contusion.

Gengyu Chen, Huibin Kang

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Gengyu ChenThe First Clinical Medical School, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.
Huibin KangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Backgrounds: The rapid expansion of an intraparenchymal hematoma following cerebral contusion often results in high mortality rates and a poor prognosis. Effective tools are essential for predicting and monitoring the incidence of traumatic intraparenchymal hematoma (tICH) and identifying patients at high risk of tICH expansion. This enables timely surgical interventions and appropriate medical management. Recently, numerous novel predictive tools have been developed and employed to predict tICH progression. Therefore, this review aims to outline the latest advancements in predicting tICH expansion. Methods: To find relevant studies, a search was conducted on PubMed and Google Scholar for articles published from January 2020 to April 2024. The search string used was (Cerebral Contusion) AND (Intraparenchymal Hematoma Progression OR Parenchymal Hematoma Expansion OR Intracerebral Hemorrhage Progression) AND (Predictor or Forecasting Tool). Results: In this narrative review, we focused on various radiological, clinical, and innovative indicators of acute tICH progression that have been developed and/or validated in recently years. Additionally, we explore the impact of tICH progression on long-term outcomes, suggesting potential avenues for future research. The spread of depolarization in the cortex could be a key factor in forecasting and controlling the growth of tICH in the times ahead. Conclusions: This study offers a comprehensive look at various cutting-edge imaging predictors, inflammatory indices, and integrated predictors that can aid neurosurgeons in categorizing, handling, and treating high-risk patients with acute tICH expansion.

Indexed as

Cerebral contusionHematoma expansionHematoma progressionMultihematoma fuzzy signPredictors

Identifiers

PMID39553672
PMCPMC11566669

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.