Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41146319›Full record

ArticleCritical care (London, England)2025

The lower limit margin: a determinant of autoregulatory sensitivity to changes in cerebral perfusion pressure.

Stefan Yu Bögli, Ihsane Olakorede, Erta Beqiri, Xuhang Chen, Andrea Lavinio, Peter Hutchinson, Peter Smielewski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

7 authors.

Stefan Yu BögliBrain Physics Laboratory, Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. stefanyu.boegli@usz.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5386-0811
Ihsane OlakoredeBrain Physics Laboratory, Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Erta BeqiriBrain Physics Laboratory, Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Xuhang ChenBrain Physics Laboratory, Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Andrea LavinioDivision of Anaesthesia, Department of Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Peter HutchinsonDivision of Neurosurgery, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Peter SmielewskiBrain Physics Laboratory, Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

National Institute for Health and Care Research Senior Investigator Award, NIHR Global Health Research Group on Acquired Brain and Spine Injury, NIHR Health Tech Research Centre for Brain Injury, Cambridge Biomedical Research CentreSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung 225270
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe Lower Limit Margin, defined as the difference between the autoregulation-informed optimal cerebral perfusion (CPP) target (CPPopt) and the lower limit of autoregulation (LLA), was recently introduced as a potential dynamic prognostic marker after traumatic brain injury (TBI). Conceptually, CPPopt marks the CPP associated with “optimal” autoregulatory function, while LLA represents the CPP at which cerebrovascular autoregulation is already impaired and deteriorates with further decreases in CPP. Based on the hypothesis that the effect of the Lower Limit Margin on outcome is critically mediated by the level of short-term CPP variability and the associated increase in time spent below the LLA, we aimed to explore the prognostic value of this novel marker. MATERIALS AND

methodsIn a prospective cohort of 234 severe TBI patients receiving invasive multimodality monitoring, we evaluated the prognostic and physiological relevance of the Lower Limit Margin. Minute-by-minute CPP, CPPopt, and LLA were derived using automated, validated methods. The association between the Lower Limit Margin with 6-month Glasgow Outcome Scale, short-term CPP variability, and autoregulatory burden (time spent below LLA) was assessed using logistic regression, ordinal analyses, mixed-effects models, causal mediation analysis, and generalized additive modeling.

resultsPatients with wider Lower Limit Margins experienced significantly less time with CPP below the LLA (β = − 2.1, CI − 2.2 to − 1.9) and had decreased odds of unfavorable outcome (OR 0.59, CI 0.41–0.83, p = 0.003). Causal mediation analysis indicated that 58.9% effect of the Lower Limit Margin on outcome was mediated by time spent below the LLA. A significant interaction between Lower Limit Margin and short-term CPP variability was observed: a narrow Lower Limit Margin combined with high short-term CPP variability were associated with the worst outcomes and higher amount of time spent with CPP below LLA. Nearly 50% of hourly short-term CPP variability exceeded ± 5 mmHg.

conclusionOur findings demonstrate that a narrow Lower Limit Margin is a marker of increased physiological vulnerability, associated with more frequent and severe CPP insults and worse neurological outcomes after TBI. These results support a shift away from single-threshold strategies (e.g., CPPopt or LLA alone) toward a resilience-informed approach that integrates the dynamic interplay between autoregulatory reserve and short-term CPP variability.

Indexed as

Brain Injuries, TraumaticCerebrovascular CirculationHomeostasisIntracranial PressureCohort StudiesFemaleGlasgow Outcome ScaleHumansMalePrognosisProspective StudiesCerebral perfusion pressureCerebrovascular autoregulationMultimodality monitoringTraumatic brain injury

Identifiers

PMID41146319
PMCPMC12560507

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.