MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3193409356 · doi:10.1177/17474930211044870

Therapeutic hypothermia for intracerebral hemorrhage: Systematic review and meta-analysis of the experimental and clinical literature

2021· review· en· W3193409356 on OpenAlexaff
Turner S. Baker, John Durbin, Zachary Troiani, Luis C. Ascanio, Rebecca B. Baron, Anthony Costa, Fred Rincón, Frederick Colbourne, Patrick Lyden, Stephan A. Mayer, Christopher P. Kellner

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Stroke · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHypothermiaIntracerebral hemorrhageMeta-analysisTherapeutic effectHematomaEdemaStroke (engine)Clinical trialAnesthesiaIntensive care medicinePharmacologySurgeryInternal medicineSubarachnoid hemorrhage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Intracerebral hemorrhage remains the deadliest form of stroke worldwide, inducing neuronal death through a wide variety of pathways. Therapeutic hypothermia is a robust and well-studied neuroprotectant widely used across a variety of specialties. AIMS: This review summarizes results from preclinical and clinical studies to highlight the overall effectiveness of therapeutic hypothermia to improve long-term intracerebral hemorrhage outcomes while also elucidating optimal protocol regimens to maximize therapeutic effect. SUMMARY OF REVIEW: A systematic review was conducted across three databases to identify trials investigating the use of therapeutic hypothermia to treat intracerebral hemorrhage. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted on preclinical studies, looking at neurobehavioral outcomes, blood brain barrier breakdown, cerebral edema, hematoma volume, and tissue loss. Several mixed-methods meta-regression models were also performed to adjust for variance and variations in hypothermia induction procedures. Twwenty-one preclinical studies and five human studies were identified. The meta-analysis of preclinical studies demonstrated a significant benefit in behavioral scores (ES = -0.43, p = 0.02), cerebral edema (ES = 1.32, p = 0.0001), and blood brain barrier (ES = 2.73, p ≤ 0.00001). Therapeutic hypothermia was not found to significantly affect hematoma expansion (ES = -0.24, p = 0.12) or tissue loss (ES = 0.06, p = 0.68). Clinical study outcome reporting was heterogeneous; however, there was recurring evidence of therapeutic hypothermia-induced edema reduction. CONCLUSIONS: The combined preclinical evidence demonstrates that therapeutic hypothermia reduced multiple cell death mechanisms initiated by intracerebral hemorrhage; yet, there is no definitive evidence in clinical studies. The cooling strategies employed in both preclinical and clinical studies were highly diverse, and focused refinement of cooling protocols should be developed in future preclinical studies. The current data for therapeutic hypothermia in intracerebral hemorrhage remains questionable despite the highly promising indications in preclinical studies. Definitive randomized controlled studies are still required to answer this therapeutic question.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.031
Bibliometrics0.0070.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations28
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of StrokeSame topicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage ResearchFrench-language works237,207