Chapter title |
Validation of a New Noninvasive Intracranial Pressure Monitoring Method by Direct Comparison with an Invasive Technique.
|
---|---|
Chapter number | 18 |
Book title |
Intracranial Pressure and Brain Monitoring XV
|
Published in |
Acta neurochirurgica Supplement, January 2016
|
DOI | 10.1007/978-3-319-22533-3_18 |
Pubmed ID | |
Book ISBNs |
978-3-31-922532-6, 978-3-31-922533-3
|
Authors |
Cabella, Brenno, Vilela, Gustavo Henrique Frigieri, Mascarenhas, Sérgio, Czosnyka, Marek, Smielewski, Peter, Dias, Celeste, Cardim, Danilo Augusto, Wang, Charles Chenwei, Mascarenhas, Paulo, Andrade, Rodrigo, Tanaka, Koji, Silva Lopes, Luiza, Colli, Benedicto Oscar, Brenno Cabella, Gustavo Henrique Frigieri Vilela, Sérgio Mascarenhas, Marek Czosnyka PhD, Peter Smielewski PhD, Celeste Dias, Danilo Augusto Cardim, Charles Chenwei Wang, Paulo Mascarenhas, Rodrigo Andrade, Koji Tanaka, Luiza Silva Lopes, Benedicto Oscar Colli, Marek Czosnyka, Peter Smielewski |
Editors |
Beng-Ti Ang |
Abstract |
The search for a completely noninvasive intracranial pressure (ICPni) monitoring technique capable of real-time digitalized monitoring is the Holy Grail of brain research. If available, it may facilitate many fundamental questions within the range of ample applications in neurosurgery, neurosciences and translational medicine, from pharmaceutical clinical trials, exercise physiology, and space applications. In this work we compare invasive measurements with noninvasive measurements obtained using the proposed new noninvasive method. Saline was infused into the spinal channel of seven rats to produce ICP changes and the simultaneous acquisition of both methods was performed. The similarity in the invasive and noninvasive methods of ICP monitoring was calculated using Pearson's correlation coefficients (r). Good agreement between measures < r > = 0.8 ± 0.2 with a range 0.28-0.96 was shown. |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 48 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 12 | 25% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 10% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 6% |
Student > Bachelor | 2 | 4% |
Other | 7 | 15% |
Unknown | 16 | 33% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 25% |
Neuroscience | 6 | 13% |
Engineering | 3 | 6% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
Other | 5 | 10% |
Unknown | 18 | 38% |