MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184012535 · doi:10.1007/s12028-021-01294-1

Brain Temperature Influences Intracranial Pressure and Cerebral Perfusion Pressure After Traumatic Brain Injury: A CENTER-TBI Study

2021· article· en· W3184012535 on OpenAlexaff
Tatiana Birg, Fabrizio Ortolano, Eveline Wiegers, Peter Smielewski, Bogdan‐Andrei Ianosi, Raimund Helbok, Sandra Rossi, Marco Carbonara, Tommaso Zoerle, Nino Stocchetti, Audny Anke, Ronny Beer, Bo‐Michael Bellander, Erta Beqiri, András Büki, Manuel Cabeleira, Arturo Chieregato, Giuseppe Citerio, Hans Clusmann, Endre Czeiter, Marek Czosnyka, Bart Depreitere, Ari Ercole, Shirin Frisvold, Stefan Jankowski, Lars‐Owe Koskinen, Ana Kowark, David K. Menon, Geert Meyfroidt, Kirsten Moeller, David Nelson, Anna Piippo-Karjalainen, Andreea Rădoi, Arminas Ragauskas, Rahul Raj, Jonathan R. Rhodes, Saulius Ročka, Rolf Rossaint, Juan Sahuquillo, Oliver Sakowitz, Nina Sundström, Riikka Takala, Tomas Tamošuitis, Olli Tenovuo, Peter Vajkoczy, Alessia Vargiolu, Rimantas Vilcinis, Stefan Wolf, Alexander Younsi, Frederick A. Zeiler

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurocritical Care · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermal Regulation in Medicine
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersEuropean CommissionFP7 HealthUniversità degli Studi di Milano
KeywordsMedicineTraumatic brain injuryCerebral perfusion pressureIntracranial pressureNeurologyAnesthesiaBrain edemaCerebral blood flowPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: After traumatic brain injury (TBI), fever is frequent. Brain temperature (BT), which is directly linked to body temperature, may influence brain physiology. Increased body and/or BT may cause secondary brain damage, with deleterious effects on intracranial pressure (ICP), cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP), and outcome. METHODS: Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI), a prospective multicenter longitudinal study on TBI in Europe and Israel, includes a high resolution cohort of patients with data sampled at a high frequency (from 100 to 500 Hz). In this study, simultaneous BT, ICP, and CPP recordings were investigated. A mixed-effects linear model was used to examine the association between different BT levels and ICP. We additionally focused on changes in ICP and CPP during the episodes of BT changes (Δ BT ≥ 0.5 °C lasting from 15 min to 3 h) up or downward. The significance of ICP and CPP variations was estimated with the paired samples Wilcoxon test (also known as Wilcoxon signed-rank test). RESULTS: Twenty-one patients with 2,435 h of simultaneous BT and ICP monitoring were studied. All patients reached a BT of 38 °C and experienced at least one episode of ICP above 20 mm Hg. The linear mixed-effects model revealed an association between BT above 37.5 °C and higher ICP levels that was not confirmed for lower BT. We identified 149 episodes of BT changes. During BT elevations (n = 79) ICP increased, whereas CPP was reduced; opposite ICP and CPP variations occurred during episodes of BT reduction (n = 70). All these changes were of moderate clinical relevance (increase of ICP of 4.5 and CPP decrease of 7.5 mm Hg for BT rise, and ICP reduction of 1.7 and CPP elevation of 3.7 mm Hg during BT defervescence), even if statistically significant (p < 0.0001). It has to be noted, however, that a number of therapeutic interventions against intracranial hypertension was documented during those episodes. CONCLUSIONS: Patients after TBI usually develop BT > 38 °C soon after the injury. BT may influence brain physiology, as reflected by ICP and CPP. An association between BT exceeding 37.5 °C and a higher ICP was identified but not confirmed for lower BT ranges. The relationship between BT, ICP, and CPP become clearer during rapid temperature changes. During episodes of temperature elevation, BT seems to have a significant impact on ICP and CPP.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.200
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations36
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurocritical CareSame topicThermal Regulation in MedicineFrench-language works237,207