Intracranial Pressure Monitored Research Articles

Abstract P447: Intracranial Pressure and Cerebral Perfusion Pressure Monitoring in Spontaneous Intracranial Hemorrhage: A Secondary Analysis of the Mistie III Trial

Introduction: Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) management guidelines recommend maintaining intracranial pressure (ICP) <20 and cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) between 50-70 mmHg. We did subgroup analyses of MISTIE III trial to explore whether minimally invasive surgery (MIS) improves ICP or CPP and whether thresholds are associated with long term outcomes. Methods: MISTIE III was a randomized clinical trial including 499 patients with spontaneous ICH randomized to MIS+Alteplase or standard medical care (SMC). Primary outcomes were any threshold event of ICP >20 and CPP <60/70 mmHg. Secondary outcomes were poor modified Rankin Scale at one year and mortality at 30/365 days. We used multivariable models to investigate factors associated with ICP/CPP events and outcomes. Results: Of 72 patients with ICP monitored for median 92 (72-96) hours, 31 (43.1%) had at least one ICP reading >20 and 52/35 (72.2/34.7%) had at least one CPP reading <70/60 mmHg. Lower intraventricular hemorrhage volume and SMC group were associated with having any ICP threshold event >20 and CPP event <70 mmHg whereas CPP<60 mmHg was associated with end of treatment (EOT) ICH volume, hydrocephalus on diagnostic CT and no prior antiplatelet agent use. On adjusted analyses, percentage of ICP readings >20 were significantly less likely in patients undergoing MIS vs SMC (Coefficient -0.79, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] [(-)1.46-(-)0.11]; p=0.02). Percentage of CPP readings <70 were significantly less frequent in MIS group (Coefficient -1.59 [(-)2.58-(-)0.59]; p=0.002). Patients who underwent successful MIS with EOT ICH volume <15mL also had significantly lower percentage of readings at ICP<20 (p=0.02), and CPP<70 (p=0.05). Lower percentage of CPP readings <60 mmHg was independently associated with lower mortality at 30 and 365 days (p=0.02 and 0.04) and CPP <70 was associated with lower one-year mortality (p=0.04). There were no significant associations with one-year functional outcome. Conclusion: Elevated ICP and inadequate CPP are not infrequent during ICP monitoring for large ICH. Burden of low CPP events predict higher short and long term mortality, but not functional outcomes. CPP may be more significant than ICP. MIS appears to mitigate ICP and CPP threshold events.

Relationship of Optic Nerve Sheath Diameter and Intracranial Hypertension in Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury.

Background:to study the association between optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD) and intracranial pressure (ICP) in patients with moderate-to-severe brain injury.Patients and Methods:A retrospective cohort study of traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients was conducted between 2010 and 2014. Data were analyzed and compared according to the ICP monitoring cutoff values. Outcomes included intracranial hypertension (ICH) and mortality.Results:A total of 167 patients with a mean age of 33 ± 14 years, of them 96 had ICP monitored. ICP values correlated with ONSD measurement (r = 0.21, P = 0.04). Patients who developed ICH were more likely to have higher mean ONSD (P = 0.01) and subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) (P = 0.004). Receiver operating curve for ONSD showed a cutoff value of 5.6 mm to detect ICH with sensitivity 72.2% and specificity 50%. Age and ICP were independent predictors of inhospital mortality in multivariate model. Another model with same covariates showed ONSD and SAH to be independent predictors of ICH. Simple linear regression showed a significant association of ONSD with increased ICP (β = 0.21, 95% confidence interval 0.25–5.08, P = 0.03).Conclusions:ONSD is a simple noninvasive measurement on initial CT in patients with TBI that could be a surrogate for ICP monitoring. However, further studies are warranted.

The Association of Intracranial Pressure Monitoring and Mortality: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort of Isolated Severe Blunt Traumatic Brain Injury.

Background:Intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring in traumatic brain injury (TBI) is common. Yet, its efficacy varies between studies, and the actual effect on the outcome is debated. This study investigates the association of ICP monitoring and clinical outcome in patients with an isolated severe blunt TBI.Patients and Methods:Patients were recruited from the American College of Surgeons-Trauma Quality Improvement Program database during 2014. Inclusion criteria were limited to adult patients (≥18 years) who had a sustained isolated severe intracranial injury (Abbreviated Injury Scale [AIS] head of ≥3 and Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] of ≤8) following blunt trauma to the head. Patients with AIS score >0 for any extracranial body area were excluded. Patients' demographics, injury characteristics, interventions, and outcomes were collected for analysis. Patients receiving ICP monitoring were matched in a 1:1 ratio with controls who were not ICP monitored using propensity score matching.Results:A total of 3289 patients met inclusion criteria. Of these, 601 (18.3%) were ICP monitored. After propensity score matching, 557 pairs were available for analysis with a mean age of 44 (standard deviation 18) years and 80.2% of them were male. Median GCS on admission was 4[3,7], and a third of patients required neurosurgical intervention. There were no statistical differences in any variables included in the analysis between the ICP-monitored group and their matched counterparts. ICP-monitored patients required significantly longer intensive care unit and hospital length of stay and had an increased mortality risk with odds ratio of 1.6 (95% confidence interval: 1.1–2.5, P = 0.038).Conclusion:ICP monitoring is associated with increased in-hospital mortality in patients with an isolated severe TBI. Further investigation into which patients may benefit from this intervention is required.

Intracranial Pressure Monitoring in Children with Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Retrospective Study.

Introduction:There is a paucity of literature on intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring in children. The aim of this study was to ascertain whether ICP monitoring is useful in children with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI).Materials and Methods:Medical records of children between 1 and 12 years, admitted to neurocritical care unit with severe TBI in 2 years, were reviewed. The children were divided into two groups: study group (ICP monitored) and control group (ICP not monitored). Admission demographics, vital parameters, and computed tomographic scan findings were recorded. In the study group, date of ICP catheter insertion/removal with ICP values and treatment carried out for increased ICP were noted. Data on tracheostomy, duration of mechanical ventilation, hospital stay, and outcome at discharge were noted.Results:Demographic variables were comparable between the two groups. When adjusted for death, no significant difference was observed between the study and the control groups in median duration of mechanical ventilation: 35 days (95% confidence interval [CI]: 12–73) versus 55 days (95% CI: 29–55) (P = 0.96), hospital stay: 36 days (95% CI: 12–73) versus 58 days (95% CI: 29–58) (P = 0.96), and time to tracheostomy: 6 days (95% CI: 5–8) versus 5 days (95% CI: 4–7) (P = 0.49). Mortality rates, incidence of cranial surgeries, and outcome at discharge were also comparable.Conclusion:ICP monitoring did not reduce the incidence of death, cranial surgeries, duration of mechanical ventilation, hospital stay, or improve the outcome at discharge in children with severe TBI.

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.

582: THE IMPACT OF INTRACRANIAL PRESSURE MONITOR USE ON OUTCOMES IN CHILDREN WITH HEPATIC ENCEPHALOPATHY

582: THE IMPACT OF INTRACRANIAL PRESSURE MONITOR USE ON OUTCOMES IN CHILDREN WITH HEPATIC ENCEPHALOPATHY

Abstract PR141

Background & Objectives: There is a paucity of literature with regard to intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring in children. The present study aims to find out the utility of ICP monitoring in children with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). Materials & Methods: Medical records of children of one to 12 years admitted to neurointensive care unit with severe TBI over a period of two years were reviewed. The children were divided into two groups (Study Group: ICP monitored and Control Group: ICP was not monitored). Admission demographics, vital parameters, computed tomographic (CT) scan findings were recorded. In the study group, date of ICP catheter insertion/removal with ICP values and treatment for increased ICP, was noted. Data on tracheostomy, duration of mechanical ventilation, hospital stay, outcome at-discharge, were noted. Appropriate statistical analysis was done. Results: Demographic variables were comparable in between the two groups. When adjusted for death, there was no significant difference in median duration of mechanical ventilation [35(95%CI 12–73) days in study group vs 55(95%CI 29–55) days in control group; p=0.96], hospital stay [36(95%CI 12–73) days in study group vs 58(95%CI 29–58) days in control group; p=0.96]; time to tracheostomy was 6(95%CI 5–8) days in study group vs 5(95%CI 4–7) days in control group (p=0.49). Mortality rates, incidence of cranial surgeries, outcome at discharge were comparable in both the groups. Age at admission and initial GCS 3–5 were the only predictors significant for outcome at discharge on multivariate analysis. Conclusion: In this study, ICP monitoring was safely carried out in children with severe TBI. However, this monitoring did not reduce the incidence of death, cranial surgeries, duration of mechanical ventilation, hospital stay, or improve the outcome at discharge, when compared to similar group of children who were managed without ICP monitoring. The GCS score and age at admission were the main predictors of outcome at discharge. Disclosure of Interest: None declared

Reply to: Measurement of intracranial pressure and short-term outcomes of patients with traumatic brain injury: a propensity-matched analysis.

Objective: To assess the impact of intracranial pressure monitoring on the short-term outcomes of traumatic brain injury patients. Methods: Retrospective observational study including 299 consecutive patients admitted due to traumatic brain injury from January 2011 through July 2012 at a Level 1 trauma center in Sao Paulo, Brazil. Patients were categorized in two groups according to the measurement of intracranial pressure (measured intracranial pressure and non-measured intracranial pressure groups). We applied a propensity-matched analysis to adjust for possible confounders (variables contained in the Crash Score prognostic algorithm). Results: Global mortality at 14 days (16%) was equal to that observed in high-income countries in the CRASH Study and was better than expected based on the CRASH calculator score (20.6%), with a standardized mortality ratio of 0.77. A total of 28 patients received intracranial pressure monitoring (measured intracranial pressure group), of whom 26 were paired in a 1:1 fashion with patients from the non-measured intracranial pressure group. There was no improvement in the measured intracranial pressure group compared to the non-measured intracranial pressure group regarding hospital mortality, 14-day mortality, or combined hospital and chronic care facility mortality. Survival up to 14 days was also similar between groups. Conclusion: Patients receiving intracranial pressure monitoring tend to have more severe traumatic brain injuries. However, after adjusting for multiple confounders using propensity scoring, no benefits in terms of survival were observed among intracranial pressure-monitored patients and those managed with a systematic clinical protocol.

Measurement of intracranial pressure and short-term outcomes of patients with traumatic brain injury: a propensity-matched analysis.

Objective To assess the impact of intracranial pressure monitoring on the short-term outcomes of traumatic brain injury patients.Methods Retrospective observational study including 299 consecutive patients admitted due to traumatic brain injury from January 2011 through July 2012 at a Level 1 trauma center in São Paulo, Brazil. Patients were categorized in two groups according to the measurement of intracranial pressure (measured intracranial pressure and non-measured intracranial pressure groups). We applied a propensity-matched analysis to adjust for possible confounders (variables contained in the Crash Score prognostic algorithm).Results Global mortality at 14 days (16%) was equal to that observed in high-income countries in the CRASH Study and was better than expected based on the CRASH calculator score (20.6%), with a standardized mortality ratio of 0.77. A total of 28 patients received intracranial pressure monitoring (measured intracranial pressure group), of whom 26 were paired in a 1:1 fashion with patients from the non-measured intracranial pressure group. There was no improvement in the measured intracranial pressure group compared to the non-measured intracranial pressure group regarding hospital mortality, 14-day mortality, or combined hospital and chronic care facility mortality. Survival up to 14 days was also similar between groups.Conclusion Patients receiving intracranial pressure monitoring tend to have more severe traumatic brain injuries. However, after adjusting for multiple confounders using propensity scoring, no benefits in terms of survival were observed among intracranial pressure-monitored patients and those managed with a systematic clinical protocol.

Outcomes and Complications of Intracranial Pressure Monitoring in Acute Liver Failure

To determine if intracranial pressure monitor placement in patients with acute liver failure is associated with significant clinical outcomes. Retrospective multicenter cohort study. Academic liver transplant centers comprising the U.S. Acute Liver Failure Study Group. Adult critically ill patients with acute liver failure presenting with grade III/IV hepatic encephalopathy (n = 629) prospectively enrolled between March 2004 and August 2011. Intracranial pressure monitored (n = 140) versus nonmonitored controls (n = 489). Intracranial pressure monitored patients were younger than controls (35 vs 43 yr, p < 0.001) and more likely to be on renal replacement therapy (52% vs 38%, p = 0.003). Of 87 intracranial pressure monitored patients with detailed information, 44 (51%) had evidence of intracranial hypertension (intracranial pressure > 25 mm Hg) and overall 21-day mortality was higher in patients with intracranial hypertension (43% vs 23%, p = 0.05). During the first 7 days, intracranial pressure monitored patients received more intracranial hypertension-directed therapies (mannitol, 56% vs 21%; hypertonic saline, 14% vs 7%; hypothermia, 24% vs 10%; p < 0.03 for each). Forty-one percent of intracranial pressure monitored patients received liver transplant (vs 18% controls; p < 0.001). Overall 21-day mortality was similar (intracranial pressure monitored 33% vs controls 38%, p = 0.24). Where data were available, hemorrhagic complications were rare in intracranial pressure monitored patients (4 of 56 [7%]; three died). When stratifying by acetaminophen status and adjusting for confounders, intracranial pressure monitor placement did not impact 21-day mortality in acetaminophen patients (p = 0.89). However, intracranial pressure monitor was associated with increased 21-day mortality in nonacetaminophen patients (odds ratio, ~ 3.04; p = 0.014). In intracranial pressure monitored patients with acute liver failure, intracranial hypertension is commonly observed. The use of intracranial pressure monitor in acetaminophen acute liver failure did not confer a significant 21-day mortality benefit, whereas in nonacetaminophen acute liver failure, it may be associated with worse outcomes. Hemorrhagic complications from intracranial pressure monitor placement were uncommon and cannot account for mortality trends. Although our results cannot conclusively confirm or refute the utility of intracranial pressure monitoring in patients with acute liver failure, patient selection and ancillary assessments of cerebral blood flow likely have a significant role. Prospective studies would be required to conclusively account for confounding by illness severity and transplant.

Prognostic significance of intracranial pressure monitoring and intracranial hypertension in severe brain trauma patients

Since without prospective randomized studies it is not possible to have a clear attitude towards the importance of intracranial pressure monitoring, this study was aimed at examining the prognostic effect of the intracranial pressure monitoring and intracranial pressure oriented therapy in severe brain trauma patients, and at defining optimal intracranial pressure values for starting the treatment. Two groups of patients were treated in the study, one consisted of 32 patients undergoing intracranial pressure monitoring and the second group of 29 patients without intracranial pressure monitoring in the control group. The study was prospective with groups randomized. There were 53% survivals in the intracranial pressure monitored patients and 34% in the control group, with no significant difference in the survival rate between the two groups (chi2=2.11; p=0.15; p>0.05). The average intracranial pressure in the patients with intracranial hypertension who died was 27 mm Hg, while in the patients who survived the average intracranial pressure was significantly lower (Student's t test: t=2.91; p=0.008; p<0.01) and it was 18 mm Hg. We recommend starting intracranial pressure oriented therapy when the patient's intracranial pressure exceeds 18 mmHg during 2 hours of monitoring.

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF DECOMPRESSIVE CRANIECTOMY AFTER MASS LESION EVACUATION IN SEVERE HEAD INJURY

This study was conducted to evaluate outcome after decompressive craniectomy (DC) in the setting of mass evacuation with or without intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring. Over a 48-month period (March 2000 to March 2004), 54 of 967 consecutive head injury patients underwent DC for evacuation of a mass lesion. DC was performed without ICP monitoring in 27 patients who required urgent decompression (group A) and in 27 patients who did not require urgent surgery and who had their ICP monitored for 1 to 14 days before surgery (group B). In group A, the mean Glasgow Coma Scale score was 6.0; 80% had computed tomographic evidence of a shift greater than 5 mm; and 25 patients underwent DC immediately after resuscitation. In group B, the mean Glasgow Coma Scale score was 7.3; 40% had computed tomographic evidence of shift; and 75% underwent DC 24 hours or longer after presentation. Overall, 22 patients died (12 in group A and 10 in group B), 11 remained vegetative or severely disabled (3 in group A and 8 in group B), and 19 had good recovery (11 in group A and 8 in group B). Two patients were lost to follow-up. In 18 group B patients with ICP greater than 20 mm Hg before mass evacuation, ICP dropped an average of 13 mm Hg (P < 0.001). A mass lesion greater than 50 mL (odds ratio [OR], 2.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-7.89) and evidence of low attenuation on computed tomography before (OR, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.1-10.3) or after (OR, 2.92; 95% CI, 1.02-8.34) DC were predictors of death. A good outcome occurred in 42% of patients with and in 63% of patients without delayed traumatic injury (OR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.1-1.1). Outcome was favorable in 78.6% of patients who had no ICP monitoring before DC versus 47.1% of patients with ICP monitoring (OR, 0.2; 95% CI, 0.1-1.2). In this study, mortality after DC for mass lesion was greater than expected, and outcome did not differ between patients with or without ICP monitoring.

Left-sided vagus nerve stimulation decreases intracranial pressure without resultant bradycardia in the pig: a potential therapeutic modality for humans.

The medical literature is lacking in data regarding intracranial pressure in an animal model with concomitant vagus nerve and spinal cord stimulation. Ten pigs were anesthetized and placed in the supine position and an intracranial pressure monitor was inserted. Each study animal had a small laminectomy performed in the lumbar region and the left vagus nerve exposed within the carotid sheath. Intracranial pressure was monitored for 3 h in all animals. Eight animals at the end of 3 h of monitoring underwent vagus nerve stimulation and or spinal cord stimulation. Study and control animals had their intracranial pressure monitored for an additional 1 and 2 h respectively. Following vagus nerve stimulation, all animals had significant (p<0.05) decreases in their intracranial pressure with a lasting effect of 15-35 min (mean 18.5 min). No significant change in blood pressure was noted during stimulation of the vagus nerve. After spinal cord stimulation all animals responded with acute increases in their intracranial pressure (p<0.05). Left vagus nerve stimulation reliably decreases intracranial pressure in the pig. The mechanism of this action remains unclear and does not appear to be due to resultant bradycardia. Conversely, stimulation of the upper lumbar spinal cord increases intracranial pressure with simultaneous increases in heart rate. Following additional studies and with close observation of cerebral perfusion pressure, we believe that left vagus nerve stimulation may represent a novel adjunctive therapy for decreasing elevated intracranial pressure in posttraumatic human patients with head injuries. Additionally, according to this animal data, minimizing spinal cord stimulation should be considered in the acute setting following head injury so as to minimize iatrogenic elevation of intracranial pressure.

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.

Survey of critical care management of comatose, head-injured patients in the United States

This survey was designed to study current practices in the monitoring and treatment of patients with severe head injury in the United States. The collected data represent answers to telephone interviews of nurse managers, clinical specialists, and staff nurses specializing in neurotrauma care at 277 randomly selected hospitals from a total pool of 624 trauma centers. Overall, 261 (94%) centers participated in the survey. Of the participating centers, 219 (84%) were providers of care for severely head-injured patients. In order to assess reliability and account for differences among respondents, personnel from 40 (15%) centers were resurveyed 6 months later and a different nursing professional was interviewed, although the questions remained the same. The largest group of respondents came from level I centers (49%), followed by level II (32%) and level III (2%). Thirty-four percent of the surveyed hospitals had a designated neurologic/neurosurgical intensive care unit, and 24% of all units surveyed were under the direction of either a neurosurgeon or a neurologist. Twenty-eight percent of the centers routinely performed intracranial pressure monitoring, while 7% of the centers reported never using this technique. The use of ventriculostomy catheters for intracranial pressure monitoring was employed in 72% of the centers, but cerebrospinal fluid drainage was utilized by only 44% of the hospitals. The percentage of patients who had their intracranial pressure monitored was significantly higher in level I trauma centers and at hospitals that treated larger numbers of severely head-injured patients (15 to 30 patients per month, which represented 15% of the hospitals surveyed). Hyperventilation and osmotic diuretics were used in 83% of centers to reduce intracranial hypertension. The administration of barbiturates was reported in 33% of the units as a treatment for intracranial hypertension. Corticosteroids were used more than half of the time in 64% of trauma centers. Twenty-nine percent of the centers reported aiming for PaCO2 values of < 25 torr (< 3.3 kPa). The survey data indicate that there is a considerable variation in the management of patients with severe head injury in the United States. The establishment of guidelines for the management of head injury based on available scientific data and moderated by practical and financial considerations may lead to improvement in the standard of care.