ArticlePhysiological reports2025
Optimal mean arterial pressure and its objective statistical associations with clinical outcomes and multimodal monitoring cerebral physiology: A systematic scoping review.
Article in Physiological reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Optimal mean arterial pressure (MAPopt), also known as optimal arterial blood pressure (ABPopt), represents a patient-specific blood pressure range at which cerebral autoregulation is most intact. To date, literature on this personalized physiological target remains heterogeneous, scattered, and difficult to follow. This scoping review, following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, examined studies that explored objective statistical associations between MAPopt and clinical outcomes and multimodal monitoring (MMM) cerebral physiology. Fifteen articles met the inclusion criteria for studies investigating the relationship between MAPopt and outcome, including seven neonatal studies, five cardiac arrest/surgery studies, two general ICU (Intensive Care Unit) studies, and one neurological ICU study. Fourteen of the fifteen studies found that maintaining blood pressure above or within MAPopt was linked to improved neurological outcomes, while pressures below MAPopt correlated with worse outcomes. In neonates with hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy, deviations below MAPopt were associated with more severe brain injury. Similarly, cardiac arrest patients spending more time below MAPopt-5 mmHg had higher mortality. Only one study evaluated MAPopt in relation to MMM data, identifying a nonlinear relationship between brain oxygenation and MAP deviation. This review underscores the need for further standardized research on MAPopt, particularly its interaction with MMM, to support its application in personalized critical care.
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.