RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Numerous trials have addressed intracranial pressure (ICP) management in neurocritical care. However, identifying its harmful thresholds and controlling ICP remain challenging in terms of improving outcomes. Evidence suggests that an individualized approach is necessary for establishing tolerance limits for ICP, incorporating factors such as ICP waveform (ICPW) or pulse morphology along with additional data provided by other invasive (e.g., brain oximetry) and noninvasive monitoring (NIM) methods (e.g., transcranial Doppler, optic nerve sheath diameter ultrasound, and pupillometry). This study aims to assess current ICP monitoring practices among experienced clinicians and explore whether guidelines should incorporate ancillary parameters from NIM and ICPW in future updates. METHODS: We conducted a survey among experienced professionals involved in researching and managing patients with severe injury across low-middle-income countries (LMICs) and high-income countries (HICs). We sought their insights on ICP monitoring, particularly focusing on the impact of NIM and ICPW in various clinical scenarios. RESULTS: From October to December 2023, 109 professionals from the Americas and Europe participated in the survey, evenly distributed between LMIC and HIC. When ICP ranged from 22 to 25 mm Hg, 62.3% of respondents were open to considering additional information, such as ICPW and other monitoring techniques, before adjusting therapy intensity levels. Moreover, 77% of respondents were inclined to reassess patients with ICP in the 18-22 mm Hg range, potentially escalating therapy intensity levels with the support of ICPW and NIM. Differences emerged between LMIC and HIC participants, with more LMIC respondents preferring arterial blood pressure transducer leveling at the heart and endorsing the use of NIM techniques and ICPW as ancillary information. CONCLUSIONS: Experienced clinicians tend to personalize ICP management, emphasizing the importance of considering various monitoring techniques. ICPW and noninvasive techniques, particularly in LMIC settings, warrant further exploration and could potentially enhance individualized patient care. The study suggests updating guidelines to include these additional components for a more personalized approach to ICP management.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Nearly one-third of patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) develop posttraumatic epilepsy (PTE). The relationship between PTE and long-term outcomes is unknown. We tested whether, after controlling for injury severity and age, PTE is associated with worse functional outcomes after severe TBI. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospective database of patients with severe TBI treated from 2002 through 2018 at a single level 1 trauma center. Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) was collected at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postinjury. We used repeated-measures logistic regression predicting GOS, dichotomized as favorable (GOS 4-5) and unfavorable (GOS 1-3), and a separate logistic model predicting mortality at 2 years. We used predictors as defined by the International Mission for Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials in TBI (IMPACT) base model (i.e., age, pupil reactivity, and GCS motor score), PTE status, and time. RESULTS: Of 392 patients who survived to discharge, 98 (25%) developed PTE. The proportion of patients with favorable outcomes at 3 months did not differ between those with and without PTE (23% [95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 15%-34%] vs 32% [95% CI: 27%-39%]; p = 0.11) but was significantly lower at 6 (33% [95% CI: 23%-44%] vs 46%; [95% CI: 39%-52%] p = 0.03), 12 (41% [95% CI: 30%-52%] vs 54% [95% CI: 47%-61%]; p = 0.03), and 24 months (40% [95% CI: 47%-61%] vs 55% [95% CI: 47%-63%]; p = 0.04). This was driven by higher rates of GOS 2 (vegetative) and 3 (severe disability) outcomes in the PTE group. By 2 years, the incidence of GOS 2 or 3 was double in the PTE group (46% [95% CI: 34%-59%]) compared with that in the non-PTE group (21% [95% CI: 16%-28%]; p < 0.001), while mortality was similar (14% [95% CI: 7%-25%] vs 23% [95% CI: 17%-30%]; p = 0.28). In multivariate analysis, patients with PTE had lower odds of favorable outcome (odds radio [OR] 0.1; 95% CI: 0.1-0.4; p < 0.001), but not mortality (OR 0.9; 95% CI: 0.1-1.9; p = 0.46). DISCUSSION: Posttraumatic epilepsy is associated with impaired recovery from severe TBI and poor functional outcomes. Early screening and treatment of PTE may improve patient outcomes.
Assuntos
Lesões Encefálicas Traumáticas , Epilepsia , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Lesões Encefálicas Traumáticas/terapia , Prognóstico , Escala de Resultado de Glasgow , Epilepsia/complicaçõesRESUMO
UNLABELLED: Brain death (BD) is determined after a patient has sustained some form of a catastrophic neurologic injury that results in an irreversible loss of cerebral and brain steam function. Variability is caused by the small number of patients who progress to BD annually causing a lack of opportunity for physicians and healthcare staff to stay competent in performing the examination. BACKGROUND: The current University of Cincinnati Medical Center policy on BD had not been updated since publication of the 2010 American Academy of Neurology guidelines on this subject. The diagnosis of BD in the medical community is an acceptable medical diagnosis, but the examination is difficult to perform, and explaining this diagnosis to a family can be challenging related to the emotions involved with discussing end of life. The goal of updating the current policy was to decrease variability in testing through consistency of practice among clinicians performing the examination. METHODS: An integrative review of the evidence-based literature was conducted to identify articles discussing both BD confirmation and secondary confirmatory testing. Using this integrative review, results from hospital-based chart reviews, and targeted provider surveys, a policy update was completed. The bedside medical clinicians were provided this policy with evidence-based guidelines regarding performance of the clinical examination and confirmatory testing needed to diagnose BD and then communicate this diagnosis to the family. RESULTS: The current hospital policy lacked two important components of any BD policy: (a) the apnea test techniques and (b) guidance regarding secondary confirmatory testing. Both components were added during revision of the policy. Implementation of the new policy occurred through computer-based training that incorporated both didactic education of the updates and a video demonstration of a BD examination. DISCUSSION: A better defined policy for determining BD is essential. In addition, the implementation and quality assurance elements of the policy are necessary for efficiency and clinical decision making. By updating the policy within the University of Cincinnati Medical Center, the clinicians have been equipped with the latest evidence to perform the clinical examination for diagnosis of BD and then appropriately communicate this diagnosis to the family.