SynthesisJournal of neurology2025
Clinical benefits of invasive intracranial pressure monitoring for spontaneous intracranial hemorrhage: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of neurology, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis meta-analysis evaluated the clinical benefits of invasive intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring for spontaneous intracranial hemorrhage with specific focuses on the hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) subgroup and the outcomes when combined with minimally invasive surgery (MIS).
methodsPubMed and Embase were searched to identify studies comparing the clinical outcomes from ICP monitoring vs. non-ICP monitoring. Primary outcomes included in-hospital and 6-month mortality rates. Secondary outcomes were hospital length of stay (LOS), proportion of patients with poor 6-month functional outcomes, and central nervous system (CNS) infection rates. Subgroup analyses were performed on hypertensive ICH subgroup and on MIS vs. non-MIS subgroups. This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024587974).
resultsThirteen studies involving 4,027 patients with spontaneous intracranial hemorrhage were included. Compared with non-ICP monitoring, ICP monitoring significantly reduced the 6-month mortality rate (43.33% vs. 28.67%, P < 0.00001), the proportion of patients with poor 6-month functional outcomes (70.49% vs. 56.71%, P = 0.0003), and hospital LOS (19.71 vs. 18.15 days, P = 0.001) but increased CNS infection rate (1.56% vs.7.49%, P < 0.00001). The hypertensive ICH subgroup analysis revealed that ICP monitoring significantly reduced in-hospital mortality rate (8.57% vs. 2.78%, P = 0.02), LOS (18.42 vs.14.54 days, P < 0.00001), and the proportion of patients with poor 6-month functional outcomes (60.00% vs. 38.77%, P = 0.001). When used with MIS, ICP monitoring significantly reduced the LOS (16.98 vs. 12.45 days, P < 0.00001) and the proportion of patients with poor 6-month functional outcomes (66.89% vs. 36.22%, P < 0.00001).
conclusionICP monitoring improves short- and long-term outcomes in patients with spontaneous intracranial hemorrhage, particularly when combined with MIS therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40178698What 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.