Secondary insults prevalence, co-occurrence and relationship with outcome after severe TBI

IF 1.9 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Brain & spine Pub Date : 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.bas.2024.102764
Joseph Donnelly , Erta Beqiri , Frederick A. Zeiler , Peter Smielewski , Marek Czosnyka
{"title":"Secondary insults prevalence, co-occurrence and relationship with outcome after severe TBI","authors":"Joseph Donnelly ,&nbsp;Erta Beqiri ,&nbsp;Frederick A. Zeiler ,&nbsp;Peter Smielewski ,&nbsp;Marek Czosnyka","doi":"10.1016/j.bas.2024.102764","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Secondary insults due to high intracranial pressure (ICP), low cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) and impaired cerebral pressure reactivity (PRx) predict outcome after severe traumatic brain injury (TBI).</p></div><div><h3>Research question</h3><p>What is the prevalence, co-occurrence and prognostic importance of secondary insults due to deranged ICP, CPP or PRx after TBI.</p></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><p>Severe TBI patients requiring ICP monitoring were included. Secondary insults due to ICP, PRx, and CPP were defined as having at least 1 h with a mean value above (or below for CPP) a respective threshold (ICP 20, CPP 60, and PRx 0.25). Percentage time with isolated or co-occurring insults was calculated (impaired ICP only, CPP only, PRx only, ICP and PRx, ICP and CPP, CPP and PRx, ICP CPP and PRx). Prognostic importance for mortality was assessed using a logistic regression model.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>822 patients were included of which 76% had elevated ICP, 92% had disturbed pressure reactivity and 55% had low CPP for at least an hour. Out of the total 115,459 h, 46,111 (40%) were spent with at least one variable within the defined secondary injury range. Odds ratios for mortality were greater for combined (impaired ICP, CPP and PRx OR 1.17 95%CI 1.09 to 1.28) than isolated insults (impaired ICP only OR 1.01 95%CI 1.00–1.02, impaired CPP only 1.00 95%CI 0.95–1.05).</p></div><div><h3>Discussion and conclusion</h3><p>ICP and autoregulation insults are common after TBI and often occur independently. Concurrent ICP, CPP and PRx insults portend worse prognosis than when a single variable is deranged.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72443,"journal":{"name":"Brain & spine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772529424000201/pdfft?md5=d012c4832dd32e36072268d5b2c3314a&pid=1-s2.0-S2772529424000201-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brain & spine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772529424000201","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Secondary insults due to high intracranial pressure (ICP), low cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) and impaired cerebral pressure reactivity (PRx) predict outcome after severe traumatic brain injury (TBI).

Research question

What is the prevalence, co-occurrence and prognostic importance of secondary insults due to deranged ICP, CPP or PRx after TBI.

Material and methods

Severe TBI patients requiring ICP monitoring were included. Secondary insults due to ICP, PRx, and CPP were defined as having at least 1 h with a mean value above (or below for CPP) a respective threshold (ICP 20, CPP 60, and PRx 0.25). Percentage time with isolated or co-occurring insults was calculated (impaired ICP only, CPP only, PRx only, ICP and PRx, ICP and CPP, CPP and PRx, ICP CPP and PRx). Prognostic importance for mortality was assessed using a logistic regression model.

Results

822 patients were included of which 76% had elevated ICP, 92% had disturbed pressure reactivity and 55% had low CPP for at least an hour. Out of the total 115,459 h, 46,111 (40%) were spent with at least one variable within the defined secondary injury range. Odds ratios for mortality were greater for combined (impaired ICP, CPP and PRx OR 1.17 95%CI 1.09 to 1.28) than isolated insults (impaired ICP only OR 1.01 95%CI 1.00–1.02, impaired CPP only 1.00 95%CI 0.95–1.05).

Discussion and conclusion

ICP and autoregulation insults are common after TBI and often occur independently. Concurrent ICP, CPP and PRx insults portend worse prognosis than when a single variable is deranged.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
严重创伤性脑损伤后继发性损伤的发生率、并发率及其与预后的关系
引言高颅内压(ICP)、低脑灌注压(CPP)和脑压反应性(PRx)导致的继发性损伤可预测严重创伤性脑损伤(TBI)后的预后。研究问题TBI后ICP、CPP或PRx失常导致的继发性损伤的发生率、共同发生率和预后重要性如何?ICP、PRx 和 CPP 引起的继发性损伤被定义为至少有 1 小时的平均值高于(或低于 CPP)各自的阈值(ICP 20、CPP 60 和 PRx 0.25)。计算单独或同时出现损伤的时间百分比(仅 ICP 受损、仅 CPP 受损、仅 PRx 受损、ICP 和 PRx 受损、ICP 和 CPP 受损、CPP 和 PRx 受损、ICP CPP 和 PRx 受损)。结果 822 名患者中,76% 的人 ICP 升高,92% 的人压力反应性紊乱,55% 的人 CPP 低至少一小时。在总计 115,459 小时中,46,111 小时(40%)至少有一个变量在定义的继发性损伤范围内。合并损伤(ICP、CPP 和 PRx 受损 OR 1.17 95%CI 1.09 至 1.28)的死亡率比单独损伤(仅 ICP 受损 OR 1.01 95%CI 1.00-1.02,仅 CPP 受损 1.00 95%CI 0.95-1.05)的死亡率要高。同时出现ICP、CPP和PRx损伤时,预后会比单一变量失常时更差。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Brain & spine
Brain & spine Surgery
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
71 days
期刊最新文献
Fat beyond muscle: Assessing epimuscular fat of the lumbar spine and its association with vertebral level, demographics, BMI, and low back pain. The application of medical ethics in the developing countries - A neurosurgical perspective. Machine learning predictive model for lumbar disc reherniation following microsurgical discectomy. A systematic review evaluating the association of atherosclerosis and lumbar degenerative disc disease. Consensus statement by the Belgian Society of Neurosurgery and literature review on the diagnosis and management of postoperative spinal epidural hematoma.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1