Explore the vast range of titles available.

IntroductionIntracranial hypertension is considered as an independent risk factor of mortality and neurological disabilities after severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). However, clinical studies have demonstrated that episodes of brain ischaemia/hypoxia are common despite normalisation of intracranial pressure (ICP). This study assesses the impact on neurological outcome of guiding therapeutic strategies based on the monitoring of both brain tissue oxygenation pressure (PbtO2) and ICP during the first 5 days following severe TBI.Methods and analysisMulticentre, open-labelled, randomised controlled superiority trial with two parallel groups in 300 patients with severe TBI. Intracerebral monitoring must be in place within the first 16 hours post-trauma. Patients are randomly assigned to the ICP group or to the ICP + PbtO2 group. The ICP group is managed according to the international guidelines to maintain ICP≤20 mm Hg. The ICP + PbtO2 group is managed to maintain PbtO2 ≥20 mm Hg in addition to the conventional optimisation of ICP. The primary outcome measure is the neurological status at 6 months as assessed using the extended Glasgow Outcome Scale. Secondary outcome measures include quality-of-life assessment, mortality rate, therapeutic intensity and incidence of critical events during the first 5 days. Analysis will be performed according to the intention-to-treat principle and full statistical analysis plan developed prior to database freeze.Ethics and disseminationThis study has been approved by the Institutional Review Board of Sud-Est V (14-CHUG-48) and from the National Agency for Medicines and Health Products Safety (Agence Nationale de Sécurité du Médicament et des produits de santé) (141 435B-31). Results will be presented at scientific meetings and published in peer-reviewed publications.The study was registered with ClinTrials NCT02754063 on 28 April 2016 (pre-results).

In a trial comparing decompressive craniectomy with medical therapy in patients with traumatic brain injury and raised intracranial pressure refractory to medical therapy, decompressive craniectomy resulted in lower mortality and higher rates of vegetative state and severe disability. After traumatic brain injury (TBI), intracranial pressure can be elevated owing to a mass effect from intracranial hematomas, contusions, diffuse brain swelling, or hydrocephalus. 1 Intracranial hypertension can lead to brain ischemia by reducing the cerebral perfusion pressure. 2 Intracranial hypertension after TBI is associated with an increased risk of death in most studies. 3 , 4 The monitoring of intracranial pressure and the administration of interventions to lower intracranial pressure are routinely used in patients with TBI, despite the lack of level 1 evidence. 5 Decompressive craniectomy is a surgical procedure in which a large section of the skull is removed and the underlying . . .

In this randomized trial involving patients with traumatic brain injury and elevated intracranial pressure, therapeutic hypothermia plus standard care to reduce intracranial pressure did not result in outcomes better than those with standard care alone. In Europe, traumatic brain injury is the most common cause of permanent disability in people younger than 40 years of age, with the annual cost exceeding €33 billion (approximately $37.5 billion in U.S. dollars). 1 , 2 Recent statistics show a 21% increase in the incidence of traumatic brain injury during the past 5 years — three times greater than the increase in population. Despite this, management of traumatic brain injury has been underrepresented in medical research as compared with other health problems. 3 Consequently, there are few data to support the commonly used stage 2 interventions (Figure 1) for the management of . . .

In this randomized trial involving 324 patients with severe traumatic brain injury in Bolivia and Ecuador, guideline-based management with intracranial pressure monitoring was not superior to management based on imaging and clinical assessments. Although the monitoring of intracranial pressure is widely recognized as standard care for patients with severe traumatic brain injury, its use in guiding therapy has incomplete acceptance, even in high-income countries. 1 – 3 Successive editions of the guidelines for the management of severe traumatic brain injury 4 – 7 have documented the inadequate evidence of efficacy, calling for randomized, controlled trials while also noting the ethical issues that would be posed if the control group consisted of patients who did not undergo monitoring. The identification of a group of intensivists in Latin America who routinely managed severe traumatic brain injury without using available . . .

Patients with severe traumatic brain injury and refractory intracranial hypertension were randomly assigned to either decompressive craniectomy or standard care. Craniectomy was associated with a significant reduction in intracranial pressure but worse outcomes. Among patients who are hospitalized with severe traumatic brain injury, 60% either die or survive with severe disability. 1 – 3 Of Australia's population of 22 million, 4 approximately 1000 patients annually sustain a severe traumatic brain injury, with associated lifetime costs estimated at $1 billion. 5 In the United States, the annual burden of traumatic brain injury is more than $60 billion. 6 After severe traumatic brain injury, medical and surgical therapies are performed to minimize secondary brain injury. 7 – 9 Increased intracranial pressure, which is typically caused by cerebral edema, is an important secondary insult. 7 , 9 , 10 Although few data regarding the monitoring of . . .

Background After aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH), elevated intracranial pressure (ICP) due to disrupted cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) dynamics is a critical concern. An external ventricular drainage (EVD) is commonly employed for management; however, optimal strategies remain debated. The randomized controlled Earlydrain trial showed that an additional prophylactic lumbar drainage (LD) after aneurysm treatment improves neurological outcome. We performed a post hoc investigation on the impact of drainage volumes and critical ICP values on patient outcomes after aSAH. Methods Using raw patient data from Earlydrain, we analyzed CSF drainage amounts and ICP measurements in the first 8 days after aSAH. Outcomes were the occurrence of secondary infarctions and the score on the modified Rankin scale after 6 months, dichotomized in values of 0–2 as favorable and 3–6 as unfavorable. Repeated measurements were considered with generalized estimation equations. Results Earlydrain recruited 287 patients, of whom 221 received an EVD and 140 received an LD. Higher EVD volumes showed a trend to more secondary infarctions ( p  = 0.09), whereas higher LD volumes were associated with less secondary infarctions ( p  = 0.009). The mean total CSF drainage was 1052 ± 659 mL and did not differ concerning infarction and neurological outcome. Maximum ICP values were higher in patients with poor outcomes but not related to drainage volumes via EVD. After adjustment for aSAH severity and total CSF drainage, higher LD volume was linked to favorable outcome (per 100 mL: odds ratio 0.61 (95% confidence interval 0.39–0.95), p  = 0.03), whereas higher EVD amounts were associated with unfavorable outcome (per 100 mL: odds ratio 1.63 (95% confidence interval 1.05–2.54), p  = 0.03). Conclusions Findings indicate that effects of CSF drainage via EVD and LD differ. Higher amounts and higher proportions of LD volumes were associated with better outcomes, suggesting a potential quantity-dependent protective effect. Optimizing LD volume and mitigating ICP spikes may be a strategy to improve patient outcomes after aSAH. Clinical trial registration : ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01258257.

Practices for controlling intracranial pressure (ICP) in traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) vary considerably between centres. To help understand the rational basis for such variance in care, this study aims to identify the patient-level predictors of changes in ICP management. We extracted all heterogeneous data (2008 pre-ICU and ICU variables) collected from a prospective cohort ( n  = 844, 51 ICUs) of ICP-monitored TBI patients in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in TBI study. We developed the TILTomorrow modelling strategy, which leverages recurrent neural networks to map a token-embedded time series representation of all variables (including missing values) to an ordinal, dynamic prediction of the following day’s five-category therapy intensity level (TIL (Basic) ) score. With 20 repeats of fivefold cross-validation, we trained TILTomorrow on different variable sets and applied the TimeSHAP (temporal extension of SHapley Additive exPlanations) algorithm to estimate variable contributions towards predictions of next-day changes in TIL (Basic) . Based on Somers’ D xy , the full range of variables explained 68% (95% CI 65–72%) of the ordinal variation in next-day changes in TIL (Basic) on day one and up to 51% (95% CI 45–56%) thereafter, when changes in TIL (Basic) became less frequent. Up to 81% (95% CI 78–85%) of this explanation could be derived from non-treatment variables (i.e., markers of pathophysiology and injury severity), but the prior trajectory of ICU management significantly improved prediction of future de-escalations in ICP-targeted treatment. Whilst there was no significant difference in the predictive discriminability (i.e., area under receiver operating characteristic curve) between next-day escalations (0.80 [95% CI 0.77–0.84]) and de-escalations (0.79 [95% CI 0.76–0.82]) in TIL (Basic) after day two, we found specific predictor effects to be more robust with de-escalations. The most important predictors of day-to-day changes in ICP management included preceding treatments, age, space-occupying lesions, ICP, metabolic derangements, and neurological function. Serial protein biomarkers were also important and may serve a useful role in the clinical armamentarium for assessing therapeutic needs. Approximately half of the ordinal variation in day-to-day changes in TIL (Basic) after day two remained unexplained, underscoring the significant contribution of unmeasured factors or clinicians’ personal preferences in ICP treatment. At the same time, specific dynamic markers of pathophysiology associated strongly with changes in treatment intensity and, upon mechanistic investigation, may improve the timing and personalised targeting of future care.

Purpose Preventive treatments of traumatic intracranial hypertension are not yet established. We aimed to compare the efficiency of half-molar sodium lactate (SL) versus saline serum solutions in preventing episodes of raised intracranial pressure (ICP) in patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). Methods This was a double-blind, randomized controlled trial including 60 patients with severe TBI requiring ICP monitoring. Patients were randomly allocated to receive a 48-h continuous infusion at 0.5 ml/kg/h of either SL (SL group) or isotonic saline solution (control group) within the first 12 h post-trauma. Serial measurements of ICP, as well as fluid, sodium, and chloride balance were performed over the 48-h study period. The primary outcome was the number of raised ICP (≥20 mmHg) requiring a specific treatment. Results Raised ICP episodes were reduced in the SL group as compared to the control group within the 48-h study period: 23 versus 53 episodes, respectively ( p  < 0.05). The proportion of patients presenting raised ICP episodes was smaller in the SL group than in the saline group: 11 (36 %) versus 20 patients (66 %) ( p  < 0.05). Cumulative 48-h fluid and chloride balances were reduced in the SL group compared to the control group (both p  < 0.01). Conclusion A 48-h infusion of SL decreased the occurrence of raised ICP episodes in patients with severe TBI, while reducing fluid and chloride balances. These findings suggest that SL solution could be considered as an alternative treatment to prevent raised ICP following severe TBI.

Mortality is higher in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) resuscitated with albumin compared with saline, but the mechanism for increased mortality is unknown. In patients from the Saline vs. Albumin Fluid Evaluation (SAFE) study with TBI who underwent intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring, interventional data were collected from randomization to day 14 to determine changes in ICP (primary outcome) and in therapies used to treat increased ICP. Pattern mixture modelling, designed to address informative dropouts, was used to compare temporal changes between the albumin and saline groups, and 321 patients were identified, of whom 164 (51.1%) received albumin and 157 (48.9%) received saline. There was a significant linear increase in mean ICP and significantly more deaths in the albumin group compared with saline when ICP monitoring was discontinued during the first week (1.30±0.33 vs. −0.37±0.36, p=0.0006; and 34.4% vs. 17.4%; p=0.006 respectively), but not when monitoring ceased during the second week (−0.08±0.44 vs. −0.23±0.38, p=0.79; and 18.6% vs. 12.1%; p=0.36 respectively). There were statistically significant differences in the mean total daily doses of morphine (−0.42±0.07 vs. −0.66±0.0, p=0.0009), propofol (−0.45±0.11 vs. −0.76±0.11; p=0.034) and norepinephrine (−0.50±0.07 vs. −0.74±0.07) and in temperature (0.03±0.03 vs. 0.16±0.03; p=0.0014) between the albumin and saline groups when ICP monitoring ceased during the first week. The use of albumin for resuscitation in patients with severe TBI is associated with increased ICP during the first week. This is the most likely mechanism of increased mortality in these patients.

Background In severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), sedatives are often used to control intracranial pressure (ICP), to reduce brain metabolism, to allow for other treatments such as mechanical ventilation or targeted temperature management, or to control paroxysmal sympathetic hyperactivity. Prolonged sedation is often necessary. The most commonly used sedatives in TBI are propofol and midazolam, often in combination, but both have significant side effects when used at high doses for several days. Ketamine, an N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist, provides sedation and analgesia with minimal respiratory depression or haemodynamic instability. However, ketamine carries a US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) precaution regarding its use in patients with pre-anaesthetic elevated cerebrospinal fluid pressure, which discourages its use in TBI patients. Several observational studies and two large meta-analyses do not suggest that the use of ketamine as an induction agent or sedative in sedated and mechanically ventilated TBI patients would increase the ICP. Off-label use of ketamine for this indication is increasing worldwide. To date, no prospective randomized clinical trial (RCT) has demonstrated the safety of ketamine in TBI patients. Methods The Brain Injury and Ketamine (BIKe) study is a prospective multicentre double-blind placebo-controlled RCT, to evaluate the safety, and effect on therapeutic intensity to reduce ICP, of ketamine as an adjunct to a standard sedation regimen in patients with severe TBI. Adult TBI patients, admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), requiring sedation and ICP monitoring within 72 h of admission, will be randomized to ketamine or placebo. The study drug will be started within 6 h of randomization. The dose of the investigational medicinal product (IMP) is 1 mg/kg/h, by continuous infusion. The IMP will be stopped when the last ICP control sedative is discontinued. Data collection will stop when the patient is discharged from the ICU. All patients will be followed for 6 months post-trauma. The study is powered for the safety endpoint of detecting a clinically relevant increase of two episodes in the median number of episodes of high intracranial pressure episodes per ICU stay. A total of 100 patients are required to meet these objectives. We hypothesize a clinically relevant reduction in the therapeutic intensity level (TIL) score of at least 3 points. Discussion This study is the first prospective RCT to investigate the safety of ketamine as an adjunct to a standard sedation regimen in TBI patients. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05097261. Registered on October 28, 2021.