ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Transcranial Color Doppler for Assessing Cerebral Venous Outflow in Critically Ill and Surgical Patients.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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.
- Pressure-targeted neurocritical care at the bedside: the emerging role of transcranial doppler.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In recent years, Transcranial Color Doppler (TCCD) has gained increasing recognition as a non-invasive neuromonitoring tool. However, there remains a strong tendency to view arterial TCCD as the 'stethoscope for the brain,' while the assessment of cerebral venous flow is still underrepresented in clinical protocols. This review aims to explore the emerging role of venous TCCD, particularly when combined with Internal Jugular Vein (IJV) ultrasound, in evaluating cerebral venous outflow in both critically ill and surgical patients. We conducted a narrative review of e-Pub articles from PubMed, MEDLINE, and Scopus, on the pathophysiological factors that impair cerebral venous drainage and their clinical implications in surgical and critical care settings. Based on this evidence, we developed two procedural algorithms that integrate established knowledge of cerebral venous hemodynamics with common clinical conditions affecting venous outflow, including internal jugular central venous catheter placement, mechanical ventilation, and pneumoperitoneum. The algorithms emphasize systematic monitoring of cerebral venous drainage, including assessment of internal jugular vein morphology and Rosenthal's vein flow, to guide procedural optimization and minimize potential neurological complications. They were informed by validated frameworks, such as the RaCeVa protocol, and are illustrated through two representative clinical case scenarios. Cerebral venous congestion can be induced by multiple established risk factors, including mechanical ventilation, cardiovascular disease, elevated intra-abdominal pressure, the Trendelenburg position, and central venous catheterization. In selected patients, real-time venous TCCD monitoring, combined with IJV assessment, allows early detection of cerebral venous outflow impairment and guides timely hemodynamic and procedural adjustments in both surgical settings and critical care contexts. Venous TCCD neuromonitoring may help prevent intracranial hypertension and its consequent neurological complications. It can guide clinical decisions during procedures that may compromise cerebral venous drainage, such as mechanical ventilation, the placement of large-bore central venous catheters, or laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgeries. Further studies are warranted to validate this strategy and better define its role in specific high-risk clinical scenarios.
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.