Intraventricular intracranial pressure monitoring improves the outcome of older adults with severe traumatic brain injury: an observational, prospective study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: You W
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4940906 | biostudies-other | 2016 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
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.
| S-EPMC5710627 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSeveral observational studies have shown that hospital-level intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring utilization varies considerably in patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). However, the relationship between hospital-level ICP monitoring utilization and clinical functional outcomes is unknown. This study examined whether patients with severe TBI treated at hospitals with high ICP monitoring utilization have better functional outcomes.MethodsA post hoc analysis of the data from a prospective multicenter cohort study in Japan was undertaken, and included severe TBI patients (Glasgow Come Scale score ≤ 8). The primary exposure was hospital-level ICP monitoring utilization. Patients treated at hospitals with more than 80% ICP monitoring utilization were assigned to a high group and the others to a low group. The primary endpoint was a favorable functional outcome at 6 months after injury, defined as a Glasgow Outcome Scale score of good recovery or moderate disability. We conducted multiple logistic regression analyses adjusted for potential confounders.ResultsOf the 427 included patients, 60 were assigned to the high group and 367 to the low group. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that patients in the high group had significantly better functional outcome (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 2.36; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.17-4.76; p = 0.016). Multiple logistic regression analysis adjusted for additional confounders supported this result (adjusted OR: 2.30; 95% CI: 1.07-4.92; p = 0.033).ConclusionTreatment at hospitals with high ICP monitoring utilization for severe TBI patients could be associated with better functional outcome.
| S-EPMC7789401 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBoth intracranial pressure (ICP) and the cerebrovascular pressure reactivity represent the dysregulation of pathways directly involved in traumatic brain injury (TBI) pathogenesis and have been used to inform clinical management. However, how these parameters evolve over time following injury and whether this evolution has any prognostic importance have not been studied.Methods and findingsWe analysed the temporal profile of ICP and pressure reactivity index (PRx), examined their relation to TBI-specific mortality, and determined if the prognostic relevance of these parameters was affected by their temporal profile using mixed models for repeated measures of ICP and PRx for the first 240 hours from the time of injury. A total of 601 adults with TBI, admitted between September 2002 to January 2016, and with high-resolution continuous monitoring from a single centre, were studied. At 6 months postinjury, 133 (19%) patients had a fatal outcome; of those, 88 (78%) died from nonsurvivable TBI or brain death. The difference in mean ICP between those with a fatal outcome and functional survivors was only significant for the first 168 hours after injury (all p < 0.05). For PRx, those patients with a fatal outcome also had a higher (more impaired) PRx throughout the first 120 hours after injury (all p < 0.05). The separation of ICP and PRx was greatest in the first 72 hours after injury. Mixed models demonstrated that the explanatory power of the PRx decreases over time; therefore, the prognostic weight assigned to PRx should similarly decrease. However, the ability of ICP to predict a fatal outcome remained relatively stable over time. As control of ICP is the central purpose of TBI management, it is likely that some of the information that is reflected in the natural history of ICP changes is no longer apparent because of therapeutic intervention.ConclusionsWe demonstrated the temporal evolution of ICP and PRx and their relationship with fatal outcome, indicating a potential early prognostic and therapeutic window. The combination of dynamic monitoring variables and their time profile improved prediction of outcome. Therefore, time-driven dynamic modelling of outcome in patients with severe TBI may allow for more accurate and clinically useful prediction models. Further research is needed to confirm and expand on these findings.
| S-EPMC5526498 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Elevated intracranial pressure is one of the proposed mechanisms leading to poor outcomes in patients with intraventricular hemorrhage. We sought to characterize the occurrence and significance of intracranial hypertension in severe intraventricular hemorrhage requiring extraventricular drainage.Prospective analysis from two randomized, multicenter, clinical trials.Intensive care units of 23 academic hospitals.One hundred patients with obstructive intraventricular hemorrhage and intracerebral hemorrhage volume <30 mL requiring emergency extraventricular drainage from two randomized multicenter studies comparing intraventricular recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (n=78) to placebo (n=22).Intracranial pressure was recorded every 4 hrs in all patients and before and after a 1-hr extraventricular drainage closure period after injection. Intracranial pressure readings were analyzed at predefined thresholds and compared between treatment groups, before and after injection of study agent, and before and after opening of third and fourth ventricles on computed tomography. Impact on 30-day outcomes was assessed.Initial intracranial pressure ranged from -2 to 60 mm Hg (median; interquartile range, 11;10). Of 2576 intracranial pressure readings, 91.5% (2359) were ?20 mm Hg, 1.6% were >30, 0.5% were >40, and 0.2% were >50 mm Hg. In a multivariate analysis, threshold events>20 mm Hg and >30 mm Hg were more frequent in placebo vs. recombinant tissue plasminogen activator-treated groups (p=.03 and p=.08, respectively). Intracranial pressure elevation>20 mm Hg occurred during a required 1-hr extraventricular drainage closure interval in 207 of 868 (23.8%) injections of study agent, although early reopening of the extraventricular drainage only occurred in 7.9%. After radiographic opening of the lower ventricular system, intracranial pressure events>20 mm Hg remained significantly associated with initial intraventricular hemorrhage volume (p=.002) and extraventricular drainage placement ipsilateral to the largest intraventricular hemorrhage volume (p=.001), but not with thrombolytic treatment (p=.05) or intracerebral hemorrhage volume (p=.14). Ventriculoperitoneal shunts were required in 13.6% of placebo and 6.4% of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator-treated patients (p=.37). Percentage of intracranial pressure readings per patient>30 mm Hg and initial intracerebral hemorrhage and intraventricular hemorrhage volumes were independent predictors of 30-day mortality after adjustment for other outcome predictors (p=.003, p=.03, and p<.001, respectively). Independent predictors of poor modified Rankin Scale score at 30 days were percent of intracranial pressure events>30 mm Hg per patient (p=.01; but not >20 mm Hg), both intracerebral hemorrhage and intraventricular hemorrhage volume, and pulse pressure.Intracranial pressure is not frequently elevated during monitoring and drainage with an extraventricular drainage in patients with severe intraventricular hemorrhage, although intracranial pressure >30 mm Hg predicts higher short-term mortality. Thrombolytic therapy may reduce the frequency of high intracranial pressure events. Intracranial pressure elevation appears to be significantly correlated with extraventricular drainage placement in the ventricle with greatest clot volume.
| S-EPMC4365868 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIntracranial-pressure monitoring is considered the standard of care for severe traumatic brain injury and is used frequently, but the efficacy of treatment based on monitoring in improving the outcome has not been rigorously assessed.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, controlled trial in which 324 patients 13 years of age or older who had severe traumatic brain injury and were being treated in intensive care units (ICUs) in Bolivia or Ecuador were randomly assigned to one of two specific protocols: guidelines-based management in which a protocol for monitoring intraparenchymal intracranial pressure was used (pressure-monitoring group) or a protocol in which treatment was based on imaging and clinical examination (imaging-clinical examination group). The primary outcome was a composite of survival time, impaired consciousness, and functional status at 3 months and 6 months and neuropsychological status at 6 months; neuropsychological status was assessed by an examiner who was unaware of protocol assignment. This composite measure was based on performance across 21 measures of functional and cognitive status and calculated as a percentile (with 0 indicating the worst performance, and 100 the best performance).ResultsThere was no significant between-group difference in the primary outcome, a composite measure based on percentile performance across 21 measures of functional and cognitive status (score, 56 in the pressure-monitoring group vs. 53 in the imaging-clinical examination group; P=0.49). Six-month mortality was 39% in the pressure-monitoring group and 41% in the imaging-clinical examination group (P=0.60). The median length of stay in the ICU was similar in the two groups (12 days in the pressure-monitoring group and 9 days in the imaging-clinical examination group; P=0.25), although the number of days of brain-specific treatments (e.g., administration of hyperosmolar fluids and the use of hyperventilation) in the ICU was higher in the imaging-clinical examination group than in the pressure-monitoring group (4.8 vs. 3.4, P=0.002). The distribution of serious adverse events was similar in the two groups.ConclusionsFor patients with severe traumatic brain injury, care focused on maintaining monitored intracranial pressure at 20 mm Hg or less was not shown to be superior to care based on imaging and clinical examination. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01068522.).
| S-EPMC3565432 | biostudies-literature
Project description: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.
| S-EPMC5193438 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Although existing guidelines support the utilization of intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI), the evidence suggesting benefit is limited. To evaluate the impact on outcome, we determined the relationship between ICP monitoring and mortality in centers participating in the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP). Data on 10,628 adults with severe TBI were derived from 155 TQIP centers over 2009-2011. Random-intercept multilevel modeling was used to evaluate the association between ICP monitoring and mortality after adjusting for important confounders. We evaluated this relationship at the patient level and at the institutional level. Overall mortality (n=3769) was 35%. Only 1874 (17.6%) patients underwent ICP monitoring, with a mortality of 32%. The adjusted odds ratio (OR) for mortality was 0.44 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.31-0.63], when comparing patients with ICP monitoring to those without. It is plausible that patients receiving ICP monitoring were selected because of an anticipated favorable outcome. To overcome this limitation, we stratified hospitals into quartiles based on ICP monitoring utilization. Hospitals with higher rates of ICP monitoring use were associated with lower mortality: The adjusted OR of death was 0.52 (95% CI, 0.35-0.78) in the quartile of hospitals with highest use, compared to the lowest. ICP monitoring utilization rates explained only 9.9% of variation in mortality across centers. Results were comparable irrespective of the method of case-mix adjustment. In this observational study, ICP monitoring utilization was associated with lower mortality. However, variability in ICP monitoring rates contributed only modestly to variability in institutional mortality rates. Identifying other institutional practices that impact on mortality is an important area for future research.
| S-EPMC3796332 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundManagement algorithms for adult severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) were omitted in later editions of the Brain Trauma Foundation's sTBI Management Guidelines, as they were not evidence-based.MethodsWe used a Delphi-method-based consensus approach to address management of sTBI patients undergoing intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring. Forty-two experienced, clinically active sTBI specialists from six continents comprised the panel. Eight surveys iterated queries and comments. An in-person meeting included whole- and small-group discussions and blinded voting. Consensus required 80% agreement. We developed heatmaps based on a traffic-light model where panelists' decision tendencies were the focus of recommendations.ResultsWe provide comprehensive algorithms for ICP-monitor-based adult sTBI management. Consensus established 18 interventions as fundamental and ten treatments not to be used. We provide a three-tier algorithm for treating elevated ICP. Treatments within a tier are considered empirically equivalent. Higher tiers involve higher risk therapies. Tiers 1, 2, and 3 include 10, 4, and 3 interventions, respectively. We include inter-tier considerations, and recommendations for critical neuroworsening to assist the recognition and treatment of declining patients. Novel elements include guidance for autoregulation-based ICP treatment based on MAP Challenge results, and two heatmaps to guide (1) ICP-monitor removal and (2) consideration of sedation holidays for neurological examination.ConclusionsOur modern and comprehensive sTBI-management protocol is designed to assist clinicians managing sTBI patients monitored with ICP-monitors alone. Consensus-based (class III evidence), it provides management recommendations based on combined expert opinion. It reflects neither a standard-of-care nor a substitute for thoughtful individualized management.
| S-EPMC6863785 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To examine the use of intracranial pressure monitors and treatment for elevated intracranial pressure in children 24 months old or younger with traumatic brain injury in North Carolina between April 2009 and March 2012 and compare this with a similar cohort recruited 2000-2001.Prospective, observational cohort study.Twelve PICUs in North Carolina.All children 24 months old or younger with traumatic brain injury, admitted to an included PICU.None.The use of intracranial pressure monitors and treatments for elevated intracranial pressure were evaluated in 238 children with traumatic brain injury. Intracranial pressure monitoring (risk ratio, 3.7; 95% CI, 1.5-9.3) and intracranial pressure therapies were more common in children with Glasgow Coma Scale less than or equal to 8 compared with Glasgow Coma Scale greater than 8. However, only 17% of children with Glasgow Coma Scale less than or equal to 8 received a monitoring device. Treatments for elevated intracranial pressure were more common in children with monitors; yet, some children without monitors received therapies traditionally used to lower intracranial pressure. Unadjusted predictors of monitoring were Glasgow Coma Scale less than or equal to 8, receipt of cardiopulmonary resuscitation, nonwhite race. Logistic regression showed no strong predictors of intracranial pressure monitor use. Compared with the 2000 cohort, children in the 2010 cohort with Glasgow Coma Scale less than or equal to 8 were less likely to receive monitoring (risk ratio, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.3-1.0), although the estimate was not precise, or intracranial pressure management therapies.Children in the 2010 cohort with a Glasgow Coma Scale less than or equal to 8 were less likely to receive an intracranial pressure monitor or hyperosmolar therapy than children in the 2000 cohort; however, about 10% of children without monitors received therapies to decrease intracranial pressure. This suggests treatment heterogeneity in children 24 months old or younger with traumatic brain injury and a need for better evidence to support treatment recommendations for this group of children.
| S-EPMC5257177 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough international guideline recommended routine intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring for patients with severe traumatic brain injury(TBI), there were conflicting outcomes attributable to ICP monitoring according to the published studies. Hence, we conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ICP monitoring in patients with TBI.MethodsBased on previous reviews, PubMed and two Chinese databases (Wangfang and VIP) were further searched to identify eligible studies. The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes included unfavourable outcome, adverse events, length of ICU stay and length of hospital stay. Weighted mean difference (WMD), odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated and pooled using fixed-effects or random-effects model.Resultstwo randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and seven cohort studies involving 11,038 patients met the inclusion criteria. ICP monitoring was not associated with a significant reduction in mortality (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.87-1.54), with substantial heterogeneity (I(2)?= 80%, P<0.00001), which was verified by the sensitivity analyses. No significant difference was found in the occurrence of unfavourable outcome (OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.99-1.98; I(2)?= 4%, P = 0.35) and adverse events (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.64-1.70; I(2)?= 78%, P = 0.03). However, we should be cautious to the result of adverse events because of the substantial heterogeneity in the comparison. Furthermore, longer ICU and hospital stay were the consistent tendency according to the pooled studies.ConclusionsNo benefit was found in patients with TBI who underwent ICP monitoring. Considering substantial clinical heterogeneity, further large sample size RCTs are needed to confirm the current findings.
| S-EPMC3931613 | biostudies-literature