SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2025
Effects of intracranial pressure monitoring in pediatric severe traumatic brain injury: a meta-analysis of cohort studies.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Intracranial Pressure Estimation Using B4C Device: A Systematic Review on the Validation Studies.Neurocritical care · 2026Review
- The effect of intracranial pressure monitoring on severe traumatic brain injury patients who undergo subdural hematoma evacuation.Neurosurgical review · 2026Article
- Pupillomotor Dysfunction and Outcomes After Decompressive Craniectomy in Pediatric Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Age-stratified neurosurgical outcomes for traumatic brain injury in a pediatric neurosurgical cohort in La Paz, Bolivia.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: As Severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a major cause of pediatric morbidity and mortality. The clinical benefits of intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring in pediatric TBI remain debated. This meta-analysis aims to assess the impact of ICP monitoring on outcomes in children with severe TBI. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Studies comparing pediatric severe TBI patients with and without ICP monitoring were included. Primary outcomes included in-hospital mortality and complications, while secondary outcomes included craniotomy/craniectomy rate, length of hospital stay and ICU stay, mechanical ventilation duration, and medical costs. Quality assessment was performed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) for cohort studies. The weighted mean difference (WMD) for continuous variables and odds ratio (OR) for dichotomous variables were calculated, along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.1 software. Results: Eight studies (12,987 patients) were included. ICP monitoring showed no significant impact on overall in-hospital mortality (OR, 1.14; Conclusion: This meta-analysis found no overall reduction in in-hospital mortality with ICP monitoring in pediatric severe TBI, potentially due to baseline severity imbalances in retrospective studies. However, PSM studies suggest a mortality benefit, indicating that ICP monitoring may be effective when confounding is minimized. Increased complication risks, longer hospital/ICU stays, prolonged ventilation, and higher costs were associated with monitoring, though these may reflect injury severity rather than monitoring itself. Given the limitations of this study, these findings should be interpreted cautiously.
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.