ArticlePloS one2026
Spinal cord perfusion pressure protocol for acute spinal cord injury: Pragmatic implementation and early results at two sites.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designRetrospective chart review.
objectiveDescribe safety/feasibility of implementing a novel clinical protocol for acute spinal cord injury (SCI) management. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Spinal cord perfusion pressure (SCPP) has emerged as a promising target for the medical management of SCI patients. We report our early experience implementing a pragmatic SCPP-driven clinical protocol to supplant conventional mean arterial pressure (MAP) monitoring in the setting of acute SCI.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed charts of all SCI patients managed by our SCPP protocol since its adoption at two clinical sites as of 2/1/2023. The SCPP protocol was applied for all adult SCI patients of any injury grade, at any injury level with cord tissue involvement. Intrathecal pressure (ITP) was transduced by lumbar drain (LD). MAP was determined from invasive blood pressure recordings. SCPP was calculated as the difference between MAP and ITP, with an SCPP goal of >65mmHg.
resultsEighteen patients have been treated since our SCPP protocol was adopted. Patients were predominately male (77.8%); the average age was 52.0 ± 16.2 years. Most injuries involved the cervical segment (72.2%), all of which were manifest clinically as central cord syndrome. The most common presenting injury severity was ASIA Impairment Scale D (44.4%). All patients underwent surgical intervention. There were no complications related to surgery, LD placement, or LD maintenance/ITP transduction during hospitalization. The SCPP protocol was continued for an average 5.2 ± 1.8 days. Eight patients required vasopressor support (44.4%) during that period, for an average 3.1 ± 2.1 days. Five patients underwent therapeutic CSF drainage to augment SCPP (27.8%). All patients maintained an average SCPP above goal for the duration of monitoring.
conclusionsThis study further establishes the safety and feasibility of monitoring SCPP via LD measurement of ITP in acute SCI patients treated by clinical protocol at two clinical sites. There were no complications related to LD placement/maintenance or SCPP monitoring.
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.