The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Hypertonic saline versus mannitol for the treatment of elevated intracranial pressure: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials*
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Randomized trials have suggested that hypertonic saline solutions may be superior to mannitol for the treatment of elevated intracranial pressure, but their impact on clinical practice has been limited, partly by their small size. We therefore combined their findings in a meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: We searched for relevant studies in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Scopus, and ISI Web of Knowledge. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized trials were included if they directly compared equiosmolar doses of hypertonic sodium solutions to mannitol for the treatment of elevated intracranial pressure in human subjects undergoing quantitative intracranial pressure measurement. DATA EXTRACTION: Two investigators independently reviewed potentially eligible trials and extracted data using a preformed data collection sheet. Disagreements were resolved by consensus or by a third investigator if needed. We collected data on patient demographics, type of intracranial pathology, baseline intracranial pressure, osms per treatment dose, quantitative change in intracranial pressure, and prespecified adverse events. Our primary outcome was the proportion of successfully treated episodes of elevated intracranial pressure. DATA SYNTHESIS: Five trials comprising 112 patients with 184 episodes of elevated intracranial pressure met our inclusion criteria. In random-effects models, the relative risk of intracranial pressure control was 1.16 (95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.33), and the difference in mean intracranial pressure reduction was 2.0 mm Hg (95% confidence interval, -1.6 to 5.7), with both favoring hypertonic saline over mannitol. A mild degree of heterogeneity was present among the included trials. There were no significant adverse events reported. CONCLUSIONS: We found that hypertonic saline is more effective than mannitol for the treatment of elevated intracranial pressure. Our meta-analysis is limited by the small number and size of eligible trials, but our findings suggest that hypertonic saline may be superior to the current standard of care and argue for a large, multicenter, randomized trial to definitively establish the first-line medical therapy for intracranial hypertension.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Moher, D., Cook, D. J., Eastwood, S., Olkin, I., Rennie, D., & Stroup, D. F. (1999) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(99)04149-5 · Cited by 4,826
Assessing Risk of Bias in Included Studies
Higgins, J. P., & Altman, D. G. (2008) · Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions · doi:10.1002/9780470712184.ch8 · Cited by 3,396
Analysing Data and Undertaking Meta‐Analyses
Deeks, J. J., Higgins, J. P., & Altman, D. G. (2008) · Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions · doi:10.1002/9780470712184.ch9 · Cited by 1,800
Imputing missing standard deviations in meta-analyses can provide accurate results
Furukawa, T. A., Barbui, C., Cipriani, A., Brambilla, P., & Watanabe, N. (2006) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.06.006 · Cited by 1,568
Should Unpublished Data Be Included in Meta-analyses?: Current Convictions and Controversies
Cook, D. J. (1993) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.1993.03500210049030 · Cited by 259 · cited 1×
“gov registry, but we did not plan to include such studies in our analysis because of concerns about methodological limitations of unpublished trials (20).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Kamel, H., Navi, B. B., Nakagawa, K., Hemphill, J. C., & Ko, N. U.
- Venue
- Critical Care Medicine
- Published
- 2011-03
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 554-559
- ISSN
- 0090-3493 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2125891777
- Cited by
- 360
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 3.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Hypertonic saline versus mannitol for the treatment of elevated intracranial pressure: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials*. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/ccm.0b013e318206b9be
- The paper
- Kamel, H., Navi, B. B., Nakagawa, K., Hemphill, J. C., & Ko, N. U. (2011). Hypertonic saline versus mannitol for the treatment of elevated intracranial pressure: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials*. Critical Care Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1097/ccm.0b013e318206b9be
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.