Trial reportCritical care (London, England)2026
Early inhaled isoflurane sedation in neurocritical patients with invasive intracranial pressure monitoring: the NEURO-CONDA randomized pilot trial.
Trial report in Critical care (London, England), 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.
- Environmental burden of the neuro-conda trial.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeEvidence on inhaled sedation in neurocritically ill patients remains limited, mainly due to concerns about potential increases in intracranial pressure (ICP). We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of early isoflurane sedation compared with propofol in invasively monitored neurocritical patients without intracranial hypertension.
methodsNEURO-CONDA is a phase IV, randomized, open-label, parallel-group pilot trial conducted in a tertiary ICU (May 2024-October 2025). Adult neurocritical patients requiring ICP monitoring and without intracranial hypertension were randomized to receive either propofol or isoflurane. The primary endpoints were efficacy (assessed with RASS and BIS™) and safety, defined as the occurrence of serious adverse drug reactions (ADRs), including sustained ICP elevation or cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) < 60 mmHg requiring increased vasopressor support. Nociception (NOL®) and other systemic parameters were recorded for up to 72 h. Analyses were performed according to the intention-to-treat principle.
resultsThirty patients were included (15 per group), and baseline characteristics were comparable; 19 had traumatic brain injury. Sedation efficacy was 100% in both groups throughout the study period. No serious ADRs occurred. ICP and CPP remained stable throughout the study period without requiring higher doses of vasopressors in the isoflurane sedated group.
conclusionsIn this randomized pilot trial, early sedation with isoflurane was feasible and achieved reliable deep sedation without compromising intracranial or cerebral perfusion parameters in invasively monitored neurocritical patients without intracranial hypertension. Larger randomized studies are warranted to confirm these findings and assess long-term neurological outcomes.
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.