Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40443968›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2025

Brain compliance: a new assessment for clinical practice?

Laura Smaniotto Saraiva, Gustavo Frigieri, Bruna Eibel, Eduardo Costa Duarte Barbosa

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

4 authors.

Laura Smaniotto SaraivaSchool Medicine Pontificia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Gustavo FrigieriBrain4care, São Paulo, Brazil.
Bruna EibelInstitute of Cardiology/University Foundation of Cardiology, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Eduardo Costa Duarte BarbosaDepartment of Hypertension and Cardiometabolism, São Francisco Hospital, Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The correlation between pulse wave velocity (PWV) and brain compliance acquired using Brain4care (B4C) monitors is an emerging field of study that aims to better understand cerebrovascular health and its implications for cognitive function and brain aging. Increased arterial stiffness, often due to aging or hypertension, impairs brain compliance, which is crucial for maintaining cerebral homeostasis. This impairs cerebral perfusion, causing microvascular brain damage, which may contribute to long-term cognitive impairment. The B4C sensors monitor cerebral compliance through the analysis of pulsatile waves derived from the cardiac cycle and has already demonstrated a significant correlation with invasive intracranial pressure (ICP) parameters, with the advantage of being non-invasive, reusable, portable, and can be used in several clinical conditions, such as intracranial hypertension (ICH) and hydrocephalus. These methods have the potential to improve the monitoring of cerebral compliance and ICP, with the benefit of avoiding the risks associated with invasive methods. The correlation between PWV and brain compliance acquired using B4C monitors highlights the importance of monitoring vascular health to preserve brain function. Increased arterial stiffness, reflected by increased PWV, is associated with decreased brain compliance, which may have significant implications for cognitive health and the risk of cerebrovascular disease.

Indexed as

arterial stiffinessbrain4carebrain compliancepulse wave velocityvascular damage

Identifiers

PMID40443968
PMCPMC12119460

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.