ArticleNeurocritical care2025
Is a Second Transcranial Doppler Study Needed to Confirm Neurocirculatory Arrest?
Article 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn determining brain death, transcranial Doppler (TCD) is one of the recommended ancillary tests when clinical examinations and apnea tests are contraindicated. The American Academy of Neurology 2023 guideline updates and 2020 World Brain Death Project advise conducting two TCDs 30 min apart to diagnose neurocirculatory arrest. Our study aimed to evaluate whether a second TCD is necessary when the first TCD shows neurocirculatory arrest (no flow, oscillating flow, or systolic spikes).
methodsWe conducted a single-center retrospective analysis of patients admitted to intensive care units from January 1, 2021, to February 1, 2025, at a community-based academic hospital. We included patients whose first study showed neurocirculatory arrest and who subsequently underwent a confirmatory TCD at least 30 min apart. A total of 48 patients were included in our final analysis. We compared the findings of the first TCD study with those of the second study and noted any differences.
resultsIn all 48 patients (100%), the second TCD confirmed the findings of the first TCD. Of these 48 patients, 44 patients (91.7%) had the same flow pattern on repeat TCD examination and 4 patients' (8.30%) TCDs showed different flow patterns, although still consistent with neurocirculatory arrest. Of the 44 patients with the same flow patterns found on first and repeat TCD examinations, 18 patients (40.9%) had both TCDs demonstrate brief systolic spikes; three patients (6.80%) had both TCDs demonstrate brief systolic spikes and oscillating flow; eight patients (18.2%) had both TCDs demonstrate no flow; seven patients (15.9%) had both TCDs demonstrate no flow and brief systolic spikes; one patient (2.30%) had both TCDs demonstrate no flow, brief systolic spikes, and oscillating flow; and, lastly, seven patients (15.9%) had both TCDs demonstrate oscillating flow.
conclusionsWe found that requiring two sequential TCD examinations to confirm neurocirculatory arrest may be unnecessary when the first TCD shows neurocirculatory arrest. Further investigation and studies such as ours in larger populations are warranted.
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.