Dataset Information

A clinical decision rule to predict intracranial hypertension in severe traumatic brain injury.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:While existing guidelines support the treatment of intracranial hypertension in severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), it is unclear when to suspect and initiate treatment for high intracranial pressure (ICP). The objective of this study was to derive a clinical decision rule that accurately predicts intracranial hypertension. METHODS:Using Delphi methods, the authors identified a set of potential predictors of intracranial hypertension and a clinical decision rule a priori by consensus among a group of 43 neurosurgeons and intensivists who have extensive experience managing severe TBI without ICP monitoring. To validate these predictors, the authors used data from a Latin American trial (n = 150; BEST TRIP). To report on the performance of the rule, they calculated sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values with 95% confidence intervals. In a secondary analysis, the rule was validated using data from a North American trial (n = 131; COBRIT). RESULTS:The final predictors and the clinical decision rule were approved by 97% of participants in the consensus working group. The predictors are divided into major and minor criteria. High ICP would be considered suspected in the presence of 1 major or ? 2 minor criteria. Major criteria are: compressed cisterns (CT classification of Marshall diffuse injury [DI] III), midline shift > 5 mm (Marshall DI IV), or nonevacuated mass lesion. Minor criteria are: Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) motor score ? 4, pupillary asymmetry, abnormal pupillary reactivity, or Marshall DI II. The area under the curve for the logistic regression model that contains all the predictors was 0.86. When high ICP was defined as > 22 mm Hg, the decision rule performed with a sensitivity of 93.9% (95% CI 85.0%-98.3%), a specificity of 42.3% (95% CI 31.7%-53.6%), a positive predictive value of 55.5% (95% CI 50.7%-60.2%), and a negative predictive value of 90% (95% CI 77.1%-96.0%). The sensitivity of the clinical decision rule improved with higher ICP cutoffs up to a sensitivity of 100% when intracranial hypertension was defined as ICP > 30 mm Hg. Similar results were found in the North American cohort. CONCLUSIONS:A simple clinical decision rule based on a combination of clinical and imaging findings was found to be highly sensitive in distinguishing patients with severe TBI who would suffer intracranial hypertension. It could be used to identify patients who require ICP monitoring in high-resource settings or start ICP-lowering treatment in environments where resource limitations preclude invasive monitoring.Clinical trial registration no.: NCT02059941 (clinicaltrials.gov).

SUBMITTER: Alali AS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6586526 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A clinical decision rule to predict intracranial hypertension in severe traumatic brain injury.

Alali Aziz S AS Temkin Nancy N Barber Jason J Pridgeon Jim J Chaddock Kelley K Dikmen Sureyya S Hendrickson Peter P Videtta Walter W Lujan Silvia S Petroni Gustavo G Guadagnoli Nahuel N Urbina Zulma Z Chesnut Randall M RM

Journal of neurosurgery 20180928 2

<h4>Objective</h4>While existing guidelines support the treatment of intracranial hypertension in severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), it is unclear when to suspect and initiate treatment for high intracranial pressure (ICP). The objective of this study was to derive a clinical decision rule that accurately predicts intracranial hypertension.<h4>Methods</h4>Using Delphi methods, the authors identified a set of potential predictors of intracranial hypertension and a clinical decision rule a prior ...[more]

PMID: 30265194

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAmong people who have suffered a traumatic brain injury, increased intracranial pressure continues to be a major cause of early death; it is estimated that about 11 people per 100 with traumatic brain injury die. Indomethacin (also known as indometacin) is a powerful cerebral vasoconstrictor that can reduce intracranial pressure and, ultimately, restore cerebral perfusion and oxygenation. Thus, indomethacin may improve the recovery of a person with traumatic brain injury.ObjectivesTo assess the effects of indomethacin for adults with severe traumatic brain injury.Search methodsWe ran the searches from inception to 23 August 2019. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 8) in the Cochrane Library, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, CINAHL Plus (EBSCO), four other databases, and clinical trials registries. We also screened reference lists and conference abstracts, and contacted experts in the field.Selection criteriaOur search criteria included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared indomethacin with any control in adults presenting with severe traumatic brain injury associated with elevated intracranial pressure, with no previous decompressive surgery.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently decided on the selection of the studies. We followed standard Cochrane methods.Main resultsWe identified no eligible studies for this review, either completed or ongoing.Authors' conclusionsWe found no studies, either completed or ongoing, that assessed the effects of indomethacin in controlling intracranial hypertension secondary to severe traumatic brain injury. Thus, we cannot draw any conclusions about the effects of indomethacin on intracranial pressure, mortality rates, quality of life, disability or adverse effects. This absence of evidence should not be interpreted as evidence of no effect for indomethacin in controlling intracranial hypertension secondary to severe traumatic brain injury. It means that we have not identified eligible research for this review.

Project description:BackgroundThe incidence of traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients of older age with comorbidities, who are pre-injury treated with antithrombotic agents (antiplatelets and/or anticoagulants), has increased. In this study, our aim was to investigate if pre-injury antithrombotic treatment was associated with worse intracranial hemorrhagic/injury progression and clinical outcome in patients with severe TBI.MethodsIn this retrospective study, including 844 TBI patients treated at our neurointensive care at Uppsala University Hospital, Sweden, 2008-2018, 159 (19%) were pre-injury treated with antithrombotic agents. Demography, admission status, radiology, treatment, and outcome variables were evaluated. Significant intracranial hemorrhagic/injury evolution was defined as hemorrhagic progression seen on the second computed tomography (CT), emergency neurosurgery after the initial CT, or death following the initial CT.ResultsPatients with pre-injury antithrombotics were significantly older and with a higher Charlson comorbidity index. They were more often injured by falls and more frequently developed acute subdural hematomas. Sixty-eight (8%) patients were pre-injury treated with monotherapy of antiplatelets, 67 (8%) patients with anticoagulants, and 24 (3%) patients with a combination of antithrombotics. Pre-injury anticoagulants, but not antiplatelets, were independently associated with significant intracranial hemorrhagic/injury evolution in a multiple regression analysis. However, neither anticoagulants nor antiplatelets were associated with mortality and unfavorable outcome in multiple regression analyses.ConclusionsOnly anticoagulants were associated with intracranial hemorrhagic/injury progression, but no antithrombotic agent correlated with worse clinical outcome. Management, including early anticoagulant reversal, availability of emergency neurosurgery, and neurointensive care, may be important aspects for reducing the adverse effects of pre-injury antithrombotics.

Project description:To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of bolus-dose fentanyl and midazolam to treat episodic intracranial hypertension in children with severe traumatic brain injury.Retrospective cohort.PICU in a university-affiliated children's hospital level I trauma center.Thirty-one children 0-18 years of age with severe traumatic brain injury (Glasgow Coma Scale score of ? 8) who received bolus doses of fentanyl and/or midazolam for treatment of episodic intracranial hypertension.None.The area under the curve from high-resolution intracranial pressure-time plots was calculated to represent cumulative intracranial hypertension exposure: area under the curve for intracranial pressure above 20 mm Hg (area under the curve-intracranial hypertension) was calculated in 15-minute epochs before and after administration of fentanyl and/or midazolam for the treatment of episodic intracranial hypertension. Our primary outcome measure, the difference between predrug and postdrug administration epochs (?area under the curve-intracranial hypertension), was calculated for all occurrences. We examined potential covariates including age, injury severity, mechanism, and time after injury; time after injury correlated with ?area under the curve-intracranial hypertension. In a mixed-effects model, with patient as a random effect, drug/dose combination as a fixed effect, and time after injury as a covariate, intracranial hypertension increased after administration of fentanyl and/or midazolam (overall aggregate mean ?area under the curve-intracranial hypertension = +17 mm Hg × min, 95% CI, 0-34 mm Hg × min; p = 0.04). The mean ?area under the curve-intracranial hypertension increased significantly after administration of high-dose fentanyl (p = 0.02), low-dose midazolam (p = 0.006), and high-dose fentanyl plus low-dose midazolam (0.007). Secondary analysis using age-dependent thresholds showed no significant impact on cerebral perfusion pressure deficit (mean ?area under the curve-cerebral perfusion pressure).Bolus dosing of fentanyl and midazolam fails to reduce the intracranial hypertension burden when administered for episodic intracranial hypertension. Paradoxically, we observed an overall increase in intracranial hypertension burden following drug administration, even after accounting for within-subject effects and time after injury. Future work is needed to confirm these findings in a prospective study design.

Project description:Purpose of reviewStandard clinical protocols for treating cerebral edema and intracranial hypertension after severe TBI have remained remarkably similar over decades. Cerebral edema and intracranial hypertension are treated interchangeably when in fact intracranial pressure (ICP) is a proxy for cerebral edema but also other processes such as extent of mass lesions, hydrocephalus, or cerebral blood volume. A complex interplay of multiple molecular mechanisms results in cerebral edema after severe TBI, and these are not measured or targeted by current clinically available tools. Addressing these underpinnings may be key to preventing or treating cerebral edema and improving outcome after severe TBI.Recent findingsThis review begins by outlining basic principles underlying the relationship between edema and ICP including the Monro-Kellie doctrine and concepts of intracranial compliance/elastance. There is a subsequent brief discussion of current guidelines for ICP monitoring/management. We then focus most of the review on an evolving precision medicine approach towards cerebral edema and intracranial hypertension after TBI. Personalization of invasive neuromonitoring parameters including ICP waveform analysis, pulse amplitude, pressure reactivity, and longitudinal trajectories are presented. This is followed by a discussion of cerebral edema subtypes (continuum of ionic/cytotoxic/vasogenic edema and progressive secondary hemorrhage). Mechanisms of potential molecular contributors to cerebral edema after TBI are reviewed. For each target, we present findings from preclinical models, and evaluate their clinical utility as biomarkers and therapeutic targets for cerebral edema reduction. This selection represents promising candidates with evidence from different research groups, overlap/inter-relatedness with other pathways, and clinical/translational potential. We outline an evolving precision medicine and translational approach towards cerebral edema and intracranial hypertension after severe TBI.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Intracranial pressure in traumatic brain injury is dynamic and influenced by factors like injury patterns, treatments, and genetics. Existing studies use time invariant summary intracranial pressure measures thus potentially losing critical information about temporal trends. We identified longitudinal intracranial pressure trajectories in severe traumatic brain injury and evaluated whether they predicted outcome. We further interrogated the model to explore whether ABCC8 polymorphisms (a known cerebraledema regulator) differed across trajectory groups. DESIGN:Prospective observational cohort. SETTING:Single-center academic medical center. PATIENTS:Four-hundred four severe traumatic brain injury patients. INTERVENTIONS:None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:We used group-based trajectory modeling to identify hourly intracranial pressure trajectories in days 0-5 post traumatic brain injury incorporating risk factor adjustment (age, sex, Glasgow Coma Scale 6score, craniectomy, primary hemorrhage pattern). We compared 6-month outcomes (Glasgow Outcome Scale, Disability Rating Scale, mortality) and ABCC8 tag-single-nucleotide polymorphisms associated with cerebral edema (rs2237982, rs7105832) across groups. Regression models determined whether trajectory groups predicted outcome. A six trajectory group model best fit the data, identifying cohorts differing in initial intracranial pressure, evolution, and number/proportion of spikes greater than 20?mm Hg. There were pattern differences in age, hemorrhage type, and craniectomy rates. ABCC8 polymorphisms differed across groups. GOS (p = 0.006), Disability Rating Scale (p = 0.001), mortality (p < 0.0001), and rs2237982 (p = 0.035) differed across groups. Unfavorable outcomes were surprisingly predicted by both low intracranial pressure trajectories and sustained intracranial hypertension. Intracranial pressure variability differed across groups (p < 0.001) and may reflect preserved/impaired intracranial elastance/compliance. CONCLUSIONS:We employed a novel approach investigating longitudinal/dynamic intracranial pressure patterns in traumatic brain injury. In a risk adjusted model, six groups were identified and predicted outcomes. If validated, trajectory modeling may be a first step toward developing a new, granular approach for intracranial pressure phenotyping in conjunction with other phenotyping tools like biomarkers and neuroimaging. This may be particularly relevant in light of changing traumatic brain injury demographics toward the elderly.

Project description:ImportanceIntracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring is a mainstay of therapy for children with traumatic brain injury (TBI), but its overall association with patient outcome is unclear.ObjectiveTo test the hypothesis that ICP monitoring is associated with improved functional survival of children with severe TBI.Design, setting, and participantsA propensity-weighted effectiveness analysis was conducted using 2 linked national databases with data from 30 US children's hospitals from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2012, on 3084 children with severe TBI. Clinical events including neurosurgical procedures were identified using validated computable phenotypes. Data analysis was conducted from September 1, 2016, to March 1, 2017.ExposurePlacement of an ICP monitor.Main outcomes and measuresA composite of hospital mortality, discharge to hospice, or survival with placement of new tracheostomy and gastrostomy tubes.ResultsOf the 3084 children in the study (1128 girls and 1956 boys; mean [SD] age, 7.03 [5.44] years), 1002 (32.4%) underwent ICP monitoring, with substantial hospital variation (6% to 50% by hospital). Overall, 484 children (15.7%) experienced the primary composite outcome. A propensity approach using matching weights generated good covariate balance between those who did and those who did not undergo ICP monitoring. Using a propensity-weighted logistic regression model clustered by hospital, no statistically significant difference was found in functional survival between monitored and unmonitored patients (odds ratio of poor outcome among those who underwent ICP monitoring, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.99-1.74). In a prespecified secondary analysis, no difference in mortality was found (odds ratio, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.89-1.50). Prespecified subgroup analyses of children younger and older than 2 years of age and among those with unintentional and inflicted (intentional) injuries also showed no difference in outcome with ICP monitoring.Conclusions and relevanceWith the use of linked national data and validated computable phenotypes, no evidence was found of a benefit from ICP monitoring on functional survival of children with severe TBI. Intracranial pressure monitoring is a widely but inconsistently used technology with incompletely demonstrated effectiveness. A large prospective cohort study or randomized trial is needed.

Dataset Information

A clinical decision rule to predict intracranial hypertension in severe traumatic brain injury.

Publications

A clinical decision rule to predict intracranial hypertension in severe traumatic brain injury.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets