ReviewWorld journal of critical care medicine2025
Management of intracranial hypertension with and without invasive intracranial pressure monitoring.
Review in World journal of critical care medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07786324 (Comparison of 3% Hypertonic Saline Versus 20% Mannitol in Reduction of Increased Intracranial Pressure in Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury Using Optic Nerve Sheath Diameter Measurements''), which is not on this 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.
Comparison of 3% Hypertonic Saline Versus 20% Mannitol in Reduction of Increased Intracranial Pressure in Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury Using Optic Nerve Sheath Diameter Measurements''
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Management of intracranial hypertension (IH) has improved in the last decades driven by advancements in monitoring technologies and a deeper understanding of its pathophysiology. Although intracranial pressure (ICP) catheters are still recommended by current guidelines for monitoring patients at risk of IH, these methods are not without limitations. Challenges include procedural complications, availability of these devices in many healthcare settings and technical issues. In this context, management in the absence of ICP monitoring is common and now it can be augmented by intensivist-led point-of-care ultrasound, which includes tools such as transcranial doppler, optic nerve sheath measurement and brain ultrasound. These methods offer anatomic information that can sometimes withhold repeated head computed tomography (CT) scans, but they are also a window into ICP dynamics without the associated risks of invasive monitoring and are reasonable alternatives for guiding treatment, provided an integration between neurological examination, head CT anatomical findings and noninvasive monitors is considered. This manuscript synthesizes the evidence for using invasive ICP monitoring and methods for non-invasive monitoring, more focused on the role of ultrasound, given its wider availability. We also propose a practical approach of how to integrate this information at bedside to avoid both under and overtreatment, by embracing a clinical epidemiology paradigm to guide management decisions.
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.