ReviewBrain & spine2024
Neurosurgical intervention in ultra-severe closed traumatic brain injury: Is it worth the effort?
Review in Brain & spine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Outcomes of Surgical Versus Conservative Management in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury (GCS 3-4) With Evacuable Mass Lesions: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Korean journal of neurotrauma · 2026Article
- Article
- Favourable outcome in a subset of ultra-severe traumatic brain injury patients - a single-centre retrospective study.Brain & spine · 2026Article
- Outcomes of Acute Subdural Hematoma in Adults with a Glasgow Coma Scale Score of 3 : An Analysis from Five Regional Trauma Centers.Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: A subgroup of severe Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) patients, known as ultra-severe (us-TBI), is most commonly defined as a post-resuscitation Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) of 3-5. There is uncertainty on whether these critically injured patients can benefit from neurosurgical intervention. Research question: The available evidence regarding the decision-making and outcome following management of us-TBI patients is critically reviewed. Material and methods: Selected databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus and Cochrane Library) were searched from 1979 to May 2024 for publications on us-TBI patients, with a focus on treatment strategy, mortality and functional outcomes. Inclusion criteria were adult patients >18 years old with closed head trauma and admission post-resuscitation GCS 3-5. Studies were independently assessed for inclusion by two reviewers, and potential disagreements were solved by consensus. Results: Where such data could be extracted, mortality rate was 27-100%, and favorable outcome was observed in 4-30% of us-TBI patients. While early aggressive neurosurgical management was associated with decreased mortality, a high proportion of patients survived with unfavorable functional status. Discussion and conclusion: With supportive care only, outcome of patients with us-TBI is almost universally poor. Early and aggressive neurosurgical intervention in addition to best medical management can lead to favorable functional outcome in selected cases particularly in younger patients with an initial GCS>3 and traumatic mass lesions. There is insufficient data regarding the effectiveness of neurosurgical management on the outcome of us-TBI patients. and the decision to initiate treatment should be based on an individual basis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.