Indications For Intracranial Pressure Monitoring Research Articles

Черепно-мозкова травма: інтенсивна терапія, моніторинг, порогові значення цільових показників

У статті подано основні принципи інтенсивної терапії, моніторингу та порогових значень внутрішньочерепного тиску, церебрального перфузійного тиску, розширеного церебрального моніторингу при тяжкій черепно-мозковій травмі, що базуються на основі останніх рекомендацій «Керівництва з лікування тяжкої черепно-мозкової травми — 2016», в умовах реанімаційного відділення стаціонару.

Intracranial pressure monitoring in patients with acute brain injury in the intensive care unit (SYNAPSE-ICU): an international, prospective observational cohort study

The indications for intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring in patients with acute brain injury and the effects of ICP on patients' outcomes are uncertain. The aims of this study were to describe current ICP monitoring practises for patients with acute brain injury at centres around the world and to assess variations in indications for ICP monitoring and interventions, and their association with long-term patient outcomes. We did a prospective, observational cohort study at 146 intensive care units (ICUs) in 42 countries. We assessed for eligibility all patients aged 18 years or older who were admitted to the ICU with either acute brain injury due to primary haemorrhagic stroke (including intracranial haemorrhage or subarachnoid haemorrhage) or traumatic brain injury. We included patients with altered levels of consciousness at ICU admission or within the first 48 h after the brain injury, as defined by the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) eye response score of 1 (no eye opening) and a GCS motor response score of at least 5 (not obeying commands). Patients not admitted to the ICU or with other forms of acute brain injury were excluded from the study. Between-centre differences in use of ICP monitoring were quantified by using the median odds ratio (MOR). We used the therapy intensity level (TIL) to quantify practice variations in ICP interventions. Primary endpoints were 6 month mortality and 6 month Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended (GOSE) score. A propensity score method with inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to estimate the association between use of ICP monitoring and these 6 month outcomes, independently of measured baseline covariates. This study is registered with ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT03257904. Between March 15, 2018, and April 30, 2019, 4776 patients were assessed for eligibility and 2395 patients were included in the study, including 1287 (54%) with traumatic brain injury, 587 (25%) with intracranial haemorrhage, and 521 (22%) with subarachnoid haemorrhage. The median age of patients was 55 years (IQR 39-69) and 1567 (65%) patients were male. Considerable variability was recorded in the use of ICP monitoring across centres (MOR 4·5, 95% CI 3·8-4·9 between two randomly selected centres for patients with similar covariates). 6 month mortality was lower in patients who had ICP monitoring (441/1318 [34%]) than in those who were not monitored (517/1049 [49%]; p<0·0001). ICP monitoring was associated with significantly lower 6 month mortality in patients with at least one unreactive pupil (hazard ratio [HR] 0·35, 95% CI 0·26-0·47; p<0·0001), and better neurological outcome at 6 months (odds ratio 0·38, 95% CI 0·26-0·56; p=0·0025). Median TIL was higher in patients with ICP monitoring (9 [IQR 7-12]) than in those who were not monitored (5 [3-8]; p<0·0001) and an increment of one point in TIL was associated with a reduction in mortality (HR 0·94, 95% CI 0·91-0·98; p=0·0011). The use of ICP monitoring and ICP management varies greatly across centres and countries. The use of ICP monitoring might be associated with a more intensive therapeutic approach and with lower 6-month mortality in more severe cases. Intracranial hypertension treatment guided by monitoring might be considered in severe cases due to the potential associated improvement in long-term clinical results. University of Milano-Bicocca and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine.

Traumatic Brain Injury Practice Guidelines: Variability in U.K. PICUs.

Traumatic brain injury in children is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Lack of high-quality evidence may lead to variation in management within and between PICUs. We examined U.K. pediatric traumatic brain injury management guidelines for extent of variability. Analysis of U.K. PICU traumatic brain injury guidelines for areas of consistency and variation among each other and against the second edition of Brain Trauma Foundation pediatric traumatic brain injury guidelines. Not applicable. Not applicable. Textual analysis of U.K. PICU guidelines. Twelve key clinical topics in three traumatic brain injury management domains were identified. We performed textual analysis of recommendations from anonymized local guidelines and compared them against each other and the Brain Trauma Foundation pediatric traumatic brain injury guidelines. Fifteen guidelines used by 16 of the 20 U.K. PICUs that manage traumatic brain injury were analyzed. Relatively better consistency was observed for intracranial pressure treatment thresholds (10/15), avoiding prophylactic hyperventilation (15/15), cerebrospinal fluid drainage (13/15), barbiturate (14/15), and decompressive craniectomy (12/15) for intracranial hypertension. There was less consistency in indications for intracranial pressure monitoring (3/15), cerebral perfusion pressure targets (2/15), target osmolarities (7/15), and hyperventilation for intracranial hypertension (2/15). Variability in choice and hierarchy of the interventions for intracranial hypertension were observed, albeit with some points of consistency. Significant variability in pediatric traumatic brain injury management guidelines exists. Despite the heterogeneity, we have highlighted a few points of consistency within the key topic areas of pediatric traumatic brain injury management. We anticipate that this provides impetus for further work around standardization.

Analysis of Normal High-Frequency Intracranial Pressure Values and Treatment Threshold in Neurocritical Care Patients

Intracranial pressure (ICP) elevation is a compartment syndrome that impairs blood flow to the brain. Despite the importance of ICP values in neurocritical care, normal ICP values and the precise ICP threshold at which treatment should be initiated remain uncertain. To refine our understanding of normal ICP values and determine the ICP threshold most strongly associated with outcome. Prospective observational study (2004-2010), with outcomes determined at hospital discharge. The study included neurocritical care patients from a single level I trauma center, San Francisco General Hospital. Three hundred eighty-three patients had a traumatic brain injury with or without craniectomy; 140 patients had another indication for ICP monitoring. Consecutive patients were studied. Data analyses were completed between March 2015 and December 2019. Five hundred twenty-three ICP-monitored patients. A computer system prospectively and automatically collected 1-minute physiologic data from patients in the intensive care unit during a 6-year period. Mean ICP was calculated, as was the proportion of ICP values greater than thresholds from 1 to 80 mm Hg in 1-mm Hg increments. The association between these measures and outcome was explored for various epochs up to 30 days from the time of injury. A principal component analysis was used to explore physiologic changes at various ICP thresholds, and elastic net regression was used to identify ICP thresholds most strongly associated with Glasgow Outcome Scale score at discharge. Of the 523 studied patients, 70.7% of studied patients were men (n = 370) and 72.1% had a traumatic brain injury (n = 377). A total of 4 090 964 1-minute ICP measurements were recorded for the included patients (7.78 years of recordings). Intracranial pressure values of 8 to 9 mm Hg were most commonly recorded and could possibly reflect normal values. The principal component analysis suggested state shifts in the physiome occurred at ICPs greater than 19 mm Hg and 24 mm Hg. Elastic net regression identified an ICP threshold of 19 mm Hg as most robustly associated with outcome when considering all neurocritical care patients, patients with TBI, and patients with TBI who underwent craniectomy. Intracranial pressure values greater than 19 mm Hg were associated with mortality, while lower values were associated with outcome in surviving patients. This study provides insight into what normal ICP values could be. An ICP threshold of 19 mm Hg was robustly associated with outcome in studied patients, although lower ICP values were associated with outcome in surviving patients.

Intracranial pressure management in patients with traumatic brain injury: an update.

Intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring and treatment is central in the management of traumatic brain injury. Despite 4 decades of clinical use, several aspects remain controversial, including the indications for ICP and treatment options. Two major trials tested surgical decompression and mild hypothermia as treatments for high ICP. Both were rigorous, randomized, multicenter studies, with different designs. Decompression was tested for ICP refractory to conventional treatment, whereas hypothermia was offered as an alternative to conventional medical therapy. Decompression reduced mortality, but at the expense of more disability. The hypothermia trial was stopped because of a worse outcome in the treated arm. Indications for ICP monitoring have been reviewed and new international guidelines issued. New contributions published in 2016 have dealt with computerized analysis for predicting ICP crises; noninvasive or innovative methods for measuring ICP; reassessment of standard therapeutic interventions, such as hypertonic solutions and the level of intensity of ICP therapy. Aggressive strategies for ICP control, like surgical decompression or hypothermia, carefully tested, have controversial effects on outcome. Several articles have made worthwhile contributions to important clinical issues, but with no real breakthroughs.

Causes and Consequences of Treatment Variation in Moderate and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Multicenter Study

Although guidelines have been developed to standardize care in traumatic brain injury, between-center variation in treatment approach has been frequently reported. We examined variation in treatment for traumatic brain injury by assessing factors influencing treatment and the association between treatment and patient outcome. Secondary analysis of prospectively collected data. Five level I trauma centers in the Netherlands (2008-2009). Five hundred three patients with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury (Glasgow Coma Scale, 3-13). We examined variation in seven treatment parameters: direct transfer, involvement of mobile medical team, mechanical ventilation, intracranial pressure monitoring, vasopressors, acute neurosurgical intervention, and extracranial operation. Data were collected on patient characteristics, treatment, and 6-month Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the extent to which treatment was determined by patient characteristics. To examine whether there were between-center differences in treatment, we used unadjusted and adjusted random effect models with the seven treatment parameters as dependent variables. The influence of treatment approach in a center (defined as aggressive and nonaggressive based on the frequency intracranial pressure monitoring) on outcome was assessed using multivariable random effect proportional odds regression models in those patients with an indication for intracranial pressure monitoring. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test alternative definitions of aggressiveness. Treatment was modestly related to patient characteristics (Nagelkerke R range, 0.12-0.52) and varied widely among centers, even after case-mix correction. Outcome was more favorable in patients treated in aggressive centers than those treated in nonaggressive centers (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.05-3.15). Sensitivity analyses, however, illustrated that the aggressiveness-outcome association was dependent on the definition used. The considerable between-center variation in treatment for patients with brain injury can only partly be explained by differences in patient characteristics. An aggressive treatment approach may imply better outcome although further confirmation is required.

Effects of Intracranial Pressure Monitoring on Mortality in Patients with Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Meta-Analysis.

BackgroundThe Brain Trauma Foundation (BTF) guidelines published in 2007 suggest some indications for intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring in severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). However, some studies had not shown clinical benefit in patients with severe TBI; several studies had even reported that ICP monitoring was associated with an increased mortality rate. The effect of ICP monitoring has remained controversial, regardless of the ICP monitoring guidelines. Here we performed a meta-analysis of published studies to assess the effects of ICP monitoring in patients with severe TBI.MethodsWe searched three comprehensive databases, the Cochrane Library, PUBMED, and EMBASE, for studies without limitations published up to September 2015. Mortality, ICU LOS, and hospital LOS were analyzed with Review Manager software according to data from the included studies.ResultsEighteen eligible studies involving 25229 patients with severe TBI were included in our meta-analysis. The results indicated no significant reduction in the ICP monitored group in mortality (hospitalized before 2007), hospital mortality (hospitalized before 2007), mortality in randomized controlled trials. However, overall mortality, mortality (hospitalized after 2007), hospital mortality (hospitalized after 2007), mortality in observational studies (hospitalized after 2007), 2-week mortality, 6-month mortality, were reduced in ICP monitored group. Patients with an increased ICP were more likely to require ICP monitoring.ConclusionSuperior survival was observed in severe TBI patients with ICP monitoring since the third edition of “Guidelines for the Management of Severe Traumatic Brain Injury,” which included “Indications for intracranial pressure monitoring,” was published in 2007.

The Neurocritical and Neurosurgical Care of Subdural Hematomas.

Subdural hematomas (SDHs), though frequently grouped together, can result from a variety of different etiologies, and therefore many different subtypes exist. Moreover, the high incidence of these lesions in the neurocritical care settings behooves practitioners to have a firm grasp on their diagnosis and management. We present here a review of SDHs, with an emphasis on how different subtypes of SDHs differ from one another and with discussion of their medical and surgical management in the neurocritical care setting. In this paper, we discuss considerations for acute, subacute, and chronic SDHs and how presentation and management may change in both the elderly and pediatric populations. We discuss SDHs that arise in the setting of anticoagulation, those that arise in the setting of active cerebrospinal fluid diversion, and those that are recurrent and recalcitrant to initial surgical evacuation. Management steps reviewed include detailed discussion of initial assessment, anticoagulation reversal, seizure prophylaxis, blood pressure management, and indications for intracranial pressure monitoring. Direct surgical management options are reviewed, including open craniotomy, twist-drill, and burr-hole drainage and the usage of subdural drainage systems. SDHs are a common finding in the neurocritical care setting and have a diverse set of presentations. With a better understanding of the fundamental differences between subtypes of SDHs, critical care practitioners can better tailor their management of both the patient's intracranial and multi-systemic pathologies.

Intracranial pressure monitoring: fundamental considerations and rationale for monitoring.

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a major cause of death and disability worldwide. In large part critical care for TBI is focused on the identification and management of secondary brain injury. This requires effective neuromonitoring that traditionally has centered on intracranial pressure (ICP). The purpose of this paper is to review the fundamental literature relative to the clinical application of ICP monitoring in TBI critical care and to provide recommendations on how the technique maybe applied to help patient management and enhance outcome. A PubMed search between 1980 and September 2013 identified 2,253 articles; 244 of which were reviewed in detail to prepare this report and the evidentiary tables. Several important concepts emerge from this review. ICP monitoring is safe and is best performed using a parenchymal monitor or ventricular catheter. While the indications for ICP monitoring are well established, there remains great variability in its use. Increased ICP, particularly the pattern of the increase and ICP refractory to treatment is associated with increased mortality. Class I evidence is lacking on how monitoring and management of ICP influences outcome. However, a large body of observational data suggests that ICP management has the potential to influence outcome, particularly when care is targeted and individualized and supplemented with data from other monitors including the clinical examination and imaging.

Intracranial pressure and cerebral perfusion pressure monitoring in non-TBI patients: special considerations.

The effect of intracranial pressure (ICP) and the role of ICP monitoring are best studied in traumatic brain injury (TBI). However, a variety of acute neurologic illnesses e.g., subarachnoid hemorrhage, intracerebral hemorrhage, ischemic stroke, meningitis/encephalitis, and select metabolic disorders, e.g., liver failure and malignant, brain tumors can affect ICP. The purpose of this paper is to review the literature about ICP monitoring in conditions other than TBI and to provide recommendations how the technique may be used in patient management. A PubMed search between 1980 and September 2013 identified 989 articles; 225 of which were reviewed in detail. The technique used to monitor ICP in non-TBI conditions is similar to that used in TBI; however, indications for ICP monitoring often are intertwined with the presence of obstructive hydrocephalus and hence the use of ventricular catheters is more frequent. Increased ICP can adversely affect outcome, particularly when it fails to respond to treatment. However, patients with elevated ICP can still have favorable outcomes. Although the influence of ICP-based care on outcome in non-TBI conditions appears less robust than in TBI, monitoring ICP and cerebral perfusion pressure can play a role in guiding therapy in select patients.

Clinical applications of intracranial pressure monitoring in traumatic brain injury : report of the Milan consensus conference.

Intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring has been for decades a cornerstone of traumatic brain injury (TBI) management. Nevertheless, in recent years, its usefulness has been questioned in several reports. A group of neurosurgeons and neurointensivists met to openly discuss, and provide consensus on, practical applications of ICP in severe adult TBI. A consensus conference was held in Milan on October 5, 2013, putting together neurosurgeons and intensivists with recognized expertise in treatment of TBI. Four topics have been selected and addressed in pro-con presentations: 1) ICP indications in diffuse brain injury, 2) cerebral contusions, 3) secondary decompressive craniectomy (DC), and 4) after evacuation of intracranial traumatic hematomas. The participants were asked to elaborate on the existing published evidence (without a systematic review) and their personal clinical experience. Based on the presentations and discussions of the conference, some drafts were circulated among the attendants. After remarks and further contributions were collected, a final document was approved by the participants. The group made the following recommendations: 1) in comatose TBI patients, in case of normal computed tomography (CT) scan, there is no indication for ICP monitoring; 2) ICP monitoring is indicated in comatose TBI patients with cerebral contusions in whom the interruption of sedation to check neurological status is dangerous and when the clinical examination is not completely reliable. The probe should be positioned on the side of the larger contusion; 3) ICP monitoring is generally recommended following a secondary DC in order to assess the effectiveness of DC in terms of ICP control and guide further therapy; 4) ICP monitoring after evacuation of an acute supratentorial intracranial hematoma should be considered for salvageable patients at increased risk of intracranial hypertension with particular perioperative features.

Chapter 3. Indications for intracranial pressure monitoring

Chapter 3. Indications for intracranial pressure monitoring

The relationship between basal cisterns on CT and time-linked intracranial pressure in paediatric head injury

Although intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring is a cornerstone of care for severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), the indications for ICP monitoring in children are unclear. Often, decisions are based on head computed tomography (CT) scan characteristics. Arguably, the patency of the basal cisterns is the most commonly used of these signs. Although raised ICP is more likely with obliterated basal cisterns, the implications of open cisterns are less clear. We examined the association between the status of perimesencephalic cisterns and time-linked ICP values in paediatric severe TBI. ICP data linked to individual head CT scans were reviewed. Basal cisterns were classified as open or closed by blinded reviewers. For the initial CT scan, we examined ICP values for the first 6 h after monitor insertion. For follow-up scans, we examined ICP values 3 h before and after scanning. Mean ICP and any episode of ICP ≥ 20 mmHg during this period were recorded. Data from 104 patients were examined. Basal cisterns were patent in 51.72% of scans, effaced in 34.48% and obliterated in 13.79%. Even when cisterns were open, more than 40% of scans had at least one episode of ICP ≥ 20 mmHg, and 14% of scans had a mean ICP ≥ 20 mmHg. The specificity of open cisterns in predicting ICP < 20 mmHg was poor (57.9%). Age-related data were worse. Children with severe TBI frequently may have open basal cisterns on head CT despite increased ICP. Open cisterns should not discourage ICP monitoring.

The Surgical Approach to the Management of Increased Intracranial Pressure After Traumatic Brain Injury

Increased intracranial pressure occurring after severe traumatic brain injury is a common and potentially devastating phenomenon. It has been clearly demonstrated that increased intracranial pressure that is refractory to initial medical measures is a poor prognostic sign. Current optimal management is based on a sequential, target-driven approach combining both medical and surgical treatment strategies. The surgical measures in current common practice include external ventricular drain insertion and decompressive craniectomy. There is evidence that both of these measures reduce intracranial pressure but the effect on outcome, particularly in the long term, is equivocal. Current Brain Trauma Foundation guidelines recommend timely evacuation of mass lesions and there is clear guidance regarding the indications for intracranial pressure monitoring; however, decompressive craniectomy is only cautiously recommended as a possible option for selected patients. In this review, we highlight the ongoing debate about the use of decompressive craniectomy to control intracranial pressure after traumatic brain injury; included is a summary of review of the most recent literature on the effect of decompressive craniectomy on increased intracranial pressure after traumatic brain injury and associated long-term outcome. The RESCUEicp and DECRA studies are discussed in detail. It is hoped that these 2 randomized controlled trials, which are evaluating the short- and longer-term outcomes of decompressive craniectomy, will provide conclusive evidence regarding the role of decompressive craniectomy in managing increased intracranial pressure after trauma.

Chapter 5. Indications for intracranial pressure monitoring in pediatric patients with severe traumatic brain injury

Two lines of evidence support the use of intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring as a treatment option in severe pediatric traumatic brain injury (TBI). In addition, guideline level support in the adult literature mirrors the pediatric evidence that ICP monitoring is of clinical benefit in severe TBI.

Chapter 5. Indications for intracranial pressure monitoring in pediatric patients with severe traumatic brain injury

Chapter 5. Indications for intracranial pressure monitoring in pediatric patients with severe traumatic brain injury

Chapter 5. Indications for intracranial pressure monitoring in pediatric patients with severe traumatic brain injury

Chapter 5. Indications for intracranial pressure monitoring in pediatric patients with severe traumatic brain injury

Intracranial pressure monitoring in two district general hospital ICUs

There is a growing consensus that, in selected patients, intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring is an appropriate intervention in district general hospitals. It improves outcome in patients with traumatic brain injury [1] and is safe [2]. In the Southwest region two district general hospitals without on-site neurosurgical facilities have been inserting Camino- fibreoptic transducers in their ICUs since 1997. I conducted a retrospective case note audit of ICP monitored patients at the two centres. Fifty-one patients had monitors inserted between 6 October 1997 and 28 February 2001. Data were collected on: sex, age, initial Glasgow coma score (GCS), diagnosis, duration of ICP monitoring and incidence and nature of complications. Sixty-nine percent of patients were male, with a median age of 29 (range 1-71 years). Median GCS was 6 and 76% had an initial GCS of 8 or less. The most common indication for ICP monitoring was traumatic brain injury (72%). Other diagnoses were anoxic coma (12%), meningitis (8%), subarachnoid haemorrhage (4%), intracerebral bleed (2%) and encephalitis (2%). Median duration of monitoring was 3 days. Only two patients were monitored for more than 5 days; both these patients received two monitors. The complication rate was low. One (2%) patient had a minor scalp haemorrhage. One (2%) patient had a small intracerebral haemorrhage, detected as an incidental finding on CT scan; it had no clinical sequelae. One (2%) monitor developed a fault and had to be resited. No infectious complications were seen. The data from this audit adds to the weight of evidence that ICP monitoring in selected patient groups is safe in district general hospitals.

Indications for Intracranial Pressure Monitoring

ICP monitoring per se has never been subjected to a prospective randomized clinical trial (PRCT) to establish its efficacy (or lack thereof) in improving outcome from severe head injury. Hence, there are insufficient data to support its use as a standard. However, there is a large body of published clinical experience that indicates that ICP monitoring (1) helps in the earlier detection of intracranial mass lesions, (2) can limit the indiscriminate use of therapies to control ICP which themselves can be potentially harmful, (3) can reduce ICP by CSF drainage and thus improve cerebral perfusion, (4) helps in determining prognosis, and (5) may improve outcome. ICP monitoring is therefore used by most head injury experts in the United States and is accepted as a relatively low-risk high-yield, modest cost intervention. Comatose head injury patients (GCS 3-8) with abnormal CT scans should undergo ICP monitoring. Comatose patients with normal CT scans have a much lower incidence of intracranial hypertension unless they have two or more of the following features at admission: age over 40, unilateral or bilateral motor posturing, or a systolic blood pressure of less than 90 mm Hg. ICP monitoring in patients with a normal CT scan with two or more of these risk factors is suggested as a guideline. Routine ICP monitoring is not indicated in patients with mild or moderate head injury. However, it may be undertaken in certain conscious patients with traumatic mass lesions at the discretion of the treating physician.

Indications for monitoring intracranial pressure

A main indication for intracranial pressure monitoring is severe head trauma, where it acts as a diagnostic, prognostic and therapeutic guide. Others indications for intracranial pressure monitoring are patients with CSF circulation disturbances, whatever the cause, and various pathologies inducing intracranial hypertension, such as encephalopathies. Intracranial pressure monitoring must be associated with the measurement of mean arterial pressure, arterial and jugular venous oxygen saturation and blood flow velocity in major intracranial arteries with transcranial Doppler sonography.