ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2024
Brain Ultrasonography in Critically Ill Septic Patients: A Scoping Review.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Transcranial sonography window description: a proposal for a rating system.The ultrasound journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sepsis-associated encephalopathy (SAE) is linked to high mortality and impaired neurologic outcome. Brain ultrasonography (US) is a non-invasive tool for cerebral monitoring. A scoping review of the literature in three databases was performed to answer if brain perfusion is altered in sepsis, to determine the role of brain US in guiding resuscitation and its ability to predict the outcome. Randomized controlled trials, clinical trials, observational studies, and systematic reviews on adults with sepsis or septic shock in the ICU were included. A total of 625 articles were screened, and 34 included. There were 85% observational studies and 15% systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis. The majority of studies had a small sample size and used different metrics. The studies focused on cerebral blood flow (CBF) alterations reporting variable results (CBF increased, normal, or decreased). The findings showed a variable rate of cerebral autoregulation (CAR) impairment, with higher incidence in the early stages of sepsis and associations with poor neurological outcomes. However, the impact of CAR and CBF alterations on neurological outcomes and mortality was not clear. Very few studies were found on resuscitation. In conclusion, brain US can identify cerebral perfusions alterations and its usage in sepsis is promising. However, the current body of evidence for its usage is poor and lacks standardization.
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.