Cerebrovascular Response to Phenylephrine in Traumatic Brain Injury: A Scoping Systematic Review of the Human and Animal Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intravenous phenylephrine (PE) is utilized commonly in critical care for cardiovascular support. Its impact on the cerebrovasculature is unclear and its use may have important implications during states of critical neurological illness. The aim of this study was to perform a scoping review of the literature on the cerebrovascular/cerebral blood flow (CBF) effects of PE in traumatic brain injury (TBI), evaluating both animal models and human studies. We searched MEDLINE, BIOSIS, EMBASE, Global Health, SCOPUS, and the Cochrane Library from inception to January 2020. We identified 12 studies with various animal models and 4 studies in humans with varying TBI pathology. There was a trend toward a consistent increase in mean arterial pressure (MAP) by the injection of PE systemically, and by proxy, an increase of the cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP). There was a consistent constriction of cerebral vessels by PE reported in the small number of studies documenting such a response. However, the heterogeneity of the literature on the CBF/cerebral blood volume (CBV) response makes the strength of the conclusions on PE limited. Studies were heterogeneous in design and had significant limitations, with most failing to adjust for confounding factors in cerebrovascular/CBF response. This review highlights the significant knowledge gap on the cerebrovascular/CBF effects of PE administration in TBI, calling for further study on the impact of PE on the cerebrovasculature both in vivo and in experimental settings.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".