Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41082009›Full record

ReviewCurrent neurology and neuroscience reports2025

Brain Protective Ventilation Strategies in Severe Acute Brain Injury.

Sarah Al Sharie, Rahma Almari, Saif Azzam, Lou'i Al-Husinat, Mohammad Araydah, Denise Battaglini, Marcus J Schultz, Nicolo' Antonino Patroniti, Patricia Rm Rocco, Chiara Robba

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current neurology and neuroscience reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07353658 (The Effect of Intermittent Versus Continuous Enteral Feeding on Outcomes in Severe Stroke), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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.

NCT07353658 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

The Effect of Intermittent Versus Continuous Enteral Feeding on Outcomes in Severe Stroke: An Exploratory Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorXijing HospitalRan2026 to 2026Enrolled60ConditionsSevere Stroke, Enteral NutritionArmsIntermittent Enteral Feeding, Continuous Enteral Feeding
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

10 authors.

Sarah Al SharieDivision of Allergy, Pulmonary, and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, United States of America.
Rahma AlmariFaculty of Medicine, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
Saif AzzamFaculty of Medicine, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
Lou'i Al-HusinatFaculty of Medicine, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
Mohammad AraydahDepartment of Internal Medicine, Istishari Hospital, Amman, Jordan.
Denise BattagliniDepartment of Surgical Sciences and Integrated Diagnostics (DISC), University of Genova, Genova, Italy.
Marcus J SchultzDepartment of Intensive Care, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Nicolo' Antonino PatronitiDepartment of Surgical Sciences and Integrated Diagnostics (DISC), University of Genova, Genova, Italy.
Patricia Rm RoccoLaboratory of Pulmonary Investigation, Carlos Chagas Filho Institute of Biophysics, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Chiara RobbaDepartment of Surgical Sciences and Integrated Diagnostics (DISC), University of Genova, Genova, Italy. kiarobba@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of the reviewThis narrative review synthesizes ten key evidence-based principles for optimizing ventilatory management in patients with acute brain injury, including traumatic brain injury, stroke, and hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy. RECENT

findingsWe emphasize the need to individualize ventilator settings to preserve intracranial pressure (ICP) and cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP), while maintaining lung-protective strategies. Key recommendations include prioritizing physiological targets over ventilator modes, judicious use of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) with concurrent cerebral monitoring, limiting plateau pressures, and maintaining tidal volumes within protective ranges. Minimizing driving pressure (ΔP) and mechanical power (MP) is emphasized to reduce the risk of ventilator-induced lung injury (VILI). The review underscores the importance of precise control of arterial carbon dioxide (PaCO₂) to regulate cerebral blood flow, avoidance of both hypoxemia and hyperoxia, and the integration of multimodal neuromonitoring to inform ventilatory decisions. Additional considerations include the potential benefits of early tracheostomy in patients requiring prolonged ventilation, as well as the influence of sedation depth, fluid management, and autoregulation monitoring on outcomes. By aligning respiratory support with cerebral pathophysiology, clinicians can mitigate secondary brain injury and enhance recovery in this vulnerable population.

Indexed as

Brain InjuriesRespiration, ArtificialAcute DiseaseBrain Injuries, TraumaticHumansHypoxia-Ischemia, BrainIntracranial PressureStrokeBrain injuryCerebral perfusionIntracranial pressureLung-protective ventilationMechanical ventilationNeurocritical care

Identifiers

PMID41082009
PMCPMC12518427

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.