Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 399

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Effect of mannitol on ICP and CBF and correlation with pressure autoregulation in severely head-injured patients

Muizelaar, J. Paul, Lutz, Harry A., Becker, Donald P.·1984·Journal of Neurosurgery

Abstract

✓ In a previous paper, the authors showed that mannitol causes cerebral vasoconstriction in response to blood viscosity decreases in cats. The present paper describes the changes in intracranial pressure (ICP) and cerebral blood flow (CBF) after mannitol administration in a group of severely head-injured patients with intact or defective autoregulation. The xenon-133 inhalation method was used to measure CBF. Autoregulation was tested by slowly increasing or decreasing the blood pressure by 30% and measuring CBF again. Mannitol was administered intravenously in a dose of 0.66 gm/kg; 25 minutes later, CBF and ICP were measured once again. In the group with intact autoregulation, mannitol had decreased ICP by 27.2%, but CBF remained unchanged. In the group with defective autoregulation, ICP had decreased by only 4.7%, but CBF increased 17.9%. One of the possible explanations for these findings is based on strong indications that autoregulation is mediated through alterations in the level of adenosine in response to oxygen availability changes in cerebral tissue. The decrease in blood viscosity after mannitol administration leads to an improved oxygen transport to the brain. When autoregulation is intact, more oxygen leads to decreased adenosine levels, resulting in vasoconstriction. The decrease in resistance to flow from the decreased blood viscosity is balanced by increased resistance from vasoconstriction, so that CBF remains the same. This might be called blood viscosity autoregulation of CBF, analogous to pressure autoregulation. Vasoconstriction also reduces cerebral blood volume, which enhances the effect of mannitol on ICP through dehydration of the brain. When autoregulation is not intact there is no vasoconstriction in response to increased oxygen availability; thus, CBF increases with decreased viscosity. With the lack of vasoconstriction, the effect on ICP through dehydration is not enhanced, so that the resulting decrease in ICP is much smaller. Such a mechanism explains why osmotic agents do not change CBF but decrease ICP in normal animals or patients with intact vasoconstriction, but do (temporarily) increase CBF in the absence of major ICP changes after stroke.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3171/jns.1984.61.4.0700

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 399

Metadata

Authors
Muizelaar, J. P., Lutz, H. A., & Becker, D. P.
Venue
Journal of Neurosurgery
Published
1984-10
Volume
61
Issue
4
Pages
700-706
ISSN
0022-3085 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1966718972
Cited by
399
References
0
FWCI
5.14
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: Effect of mannitol on ICP and CBF and correlation with pressure autoregulation in severely head-injured patients. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3171/jns.1984.61.4.0700
The paper
Muizelaar, J. P., Lutz, H. A., & Becker, D. P. (1984). Effect of mannitol on ICP and CBF and correlation with pressure autoregulation in severely head-injured patients. Journal of Neurosurgery. https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.1984.61.4.0700

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.