ArticleCritical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine2026
Decompressive craniectomy in adults with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Article in Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of decompressive craniectomy (DC) on functional outcomes, mortality, and quality of life in adults with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Data sources: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to August 1, 2026, for RCTs comparing DC with medical or surgical management in adults with moderate to severe TBI. Review methods: Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Certainty of evidence was evaluated with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using random-effect models. A trial sequential analysis was performed to assess the robustness of the findings. Results: Eight RCTs including 1326 patients met the eligibility criteria. Seven trials, including 1296 patients, reported neurological outcomes. DC did not reduce the risk of unfavourable neurological outcome, defined as Glasgow Outcome Scale scores of 1-3 or Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended scores of 1-4, at the longest available follow-up (3-12 months) (RR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.83-1.20; I Conclusions: In adults with moderate to severe TBI, DC does not reduce unfavourable neurological outcomes or overall mortality. A possible mortality benefit in selected subgroups cannot be excluded, but this may occur at the cost of survival with severe disability. Decisions should be individualised based on each patient's balance between survival and quality of life considerations.
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.