scholarly journals Facial Fractures: Independent Prediction of Neurosurgical Intervention

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brandon Lucke-Wold ◽  
Kevin Pierre ◽  
Sina Aghili-Mehrizi ◽  
Gregory Murad
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Intracranial Pressure ◽  
External Ventricular Drain ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Facial Fracture ◽  
Pressure Monitor ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Neurosurgical Intervention

Abstract Background:Over half of patients with facial fractures have associated traumatic brain injury. Based on previous force dynamic cadaveric studies, Lefort type 2 and 3 fractures are more associated with severe injury. Whether this correlates to neurosurgical intervention have not been well characterized. The purpose of this retrospective data analysis is to characterize fracture pattern types in patients requiring neurosurgical intervention and to see if this is different from those not requiring intervention. Methods:Retrospective data was collected from the trauma registry from 2010-2019. Inclusion criteria: adults over 18, confirmed facial fracture with available neuroimaging, reported traumatic brain injury, and admission to ICU or floor bed. Exclusion criteria: patients less than 18 years old, patients with no neuroimaging, and patients that were deceased prior to initiation of neurosurgical intervention. Data included: basic demographic data, presenting Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score, mechanism of injury, type of traumatic brain injury, neurosurgical intervention, and facial fracture type. Retrospective Contingency Analysis with Fraction of Total Comparison was used with Chi-Square analysis for demographic and injury characteristic data.Results:1172 patients met inclusion criteria. 1001 required no neurosurgical intervention and 171 required intervention. No significant difference was seen between the non-intervention group and intervention group in terms of demographic data or baseline injury characteristics except for presenting GCS. A significant difference was seen between groups for presenting Glasgow Coma Scale (c2=67.71, p<0.001). The intervention group had greater number of patients with GCS<8 compared to the non-intervention group. Fracture patterns were overall similar between the non-intervention group compared to intervention group (c2=4.518, p=0.92), however subset analysis did reveal a 2 fold increase in Lefort type 2 fractures and notable increase in Lefort type 3 and panfacial fractures in the intervention group. The intervention group was further divided into those requiring external ventricular drain or intracranial pressure monitor only vs. patients requiring craniectomy, craniotomy, or burr holes with or with external ventricular drain or intracranial pressure monitor. A significant difference was seen between groups (c2=20.02, p=0.03). The craniectomy, craniotomy, or burr hole group was much more likely to have Lefort type 2 or 3 fractures compared to the external ventricular drain or intracranial pressure monitor group only. Conclusions:Lefort type 2 and type 3 fractures are significantly associated with requiring neurosurgical intervention. An improved algorithm for managing these patients has been proposed in the discussion. Ongoing work will focus on validating and refining the algorithm in order to improve patient care for trauma patients with facial fracture and traumatic brain injury.

scholarly journals Traumatic Brain Injury: Bolus Versus Continuous Infusion of 3% Hypertonic Saline

2016 ◽  
Vol 101 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 361-366
Author(s):  
David Parizh ◽  
Ilya Parizh ◽  
Caitlyn Kuwata ◽  
Galina Glinik ◽  
Anthony Kopatsis
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Intracranial Pressure ◽  
Continuous Infusion ◽  
Hypertonic Saline ◽  
Serum Sodium ◽  
Increased Intracranial Pressure ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Route Of Delivery ◽  
Neurosurgical Intervention

Hypertonic saline (HTS) is used as an adjunct in the conservative management of increased intracranial pressure; however, the ideal concentration or route of delivery is unknown. Our objective was to assess whether there is a difference in route of delivery, bolus versus infusion, of 2% versus 3% HTS in patients with traumatic brain injury. The study comprises a retrospective analysis of all patients who sustained traumatic brain injury resulting in increased intracranial pressure that required HTS from January 2012 to December 2014. We examined time to therapeutic serum sodium concentration greater or equal to 150 mEq; incidence of ventriculostomy placement and neurosurgical intervention for refractory intracanial hypertension; and disability burden among the different infusates and route of delivery. A total of 169 patients received either 2% or 3% HTS, given as a bolus or continuous infusion. Patients had an average age of 61.4 years; 100 patients (59.2%) were male and 69 (40.8%) were female; 62 patients were taking either an antiplatelet or anticoagulant agent. Infusion of 3% saline was associated with the shortest interval to reaching a therapeutic level at 1.61 days (P = 0.024). There was no statistically significant difference between placement of a ventriculostomy among the bolus and infusion groups of 3% normal saline (NS) (P = 0.475). However, neurosurgical intervention was less prevalent in those receiving 3% infusion (P = 0.013). Infusion of 3% HTS was associated with a more rapid increase in serum sodium to therapeutic levels. Neurosurgical intervention for refractory hypertension was less prevalent in the 3% NS infusion group.

scholarly journals Randomized Control Trial For Transcranial Doppler monitoring in patients with Traumatic Brain Injury.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nida Fatima
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Blood Flow ◽  
Cerebral Blood Flow ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Intracranial Pressure ◽  
Transcranial Doppler ◽  
Traumatic Event ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Neurosurgical Intervention

Abstract Traumatic Brain Injury is the leading cause of disability and mortality throughout the world. It temporarily or permanently impairs the brain function. Primary injury is induced by mechanical forces and occurs at the moment of injury while secondary brain damage may occurs hours or even days after the traumatic event. This injury may result from impairment or local decline in the cerebral blood flow. Decreases in cerebral blood flow are the result of local edema, hemorrhage or increased intracranial pressure. Although major progress has been made in understanding of the pathophysiology of this injury, this has not yet led to substantial improvements in outcome. Traumatic Brain Injury is associated with various complications including raised intracranial pressure, midline shift due to worsening of the volume of intracranial hematoma, cerebral vasospasm in traumatic sub arachnoid hemorrhage. Transcranial Doppler (TCD) has been utilized as a monitoring tool in the neurocritical care unit since it is non-invasive tool and that can be brought to bedside.However, its utility in using as a protocol in management of traumatic brain injury patients has not been studied.We hypothesized that daily TCD followed by early performance of Neuroimaging (CT scan) and Neurosurgical intervention will lead to improvement in clinical outcome.Our study’s design is Randomized Controlled Trial with neurosurgical intervention based upon the Intervention Group as the TCD-Monitoring/Neuroimaging vs Control Group as the Clinical Imaging/Neurological status. Our study’s outcome is 90 days’ clinical outcome (modified rankin scale) and Glasgow Coma Outcome Scale.

scholarly journals Intracranial Pressure during External Ventricular Drainage Weaning Is an Outcome Predictor of Traumatic Brain Injury

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Jia-cheng Gu ◽  
Hong Wu ◽  
Xing-zhao Chen ◽  
Jun-feng Feng ◽  
Guo-yi Gao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Intracranial Pressure ◽  
External Ventricular Drainage ◽  
Unfavorable Outcome ◽  
Ventricular Drainage ◽  
Outcome Group ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Relationship

External ventricular drainage (EVD) is widely used in patients with a traumatic brain injury (TBI). However, the EVD weaning trial protocol varies and insufficient studies focus on the intracranial pressure (ICP) during the weaning trial. We aimed to establish the relationship between ICP during an EVD weaning trial and the outcomes of TBI. We enrolled 37 patients with a TBI with an EVD from July 2018 to September 2019. Among them, 26 were allocated to the favorable outcome group and 11 to the unfavorable outcome group (death, post-traumatic hydrocephalus, persistent vegetative state, and severe disability). Groups were well matched for sex, pupil reactivity, admission Glasgow Coma Scale score, Marshall computed tomography score, modified Fisher score, intraventricular hemorrhage, EVD days, cerebrospinal fluid output before the weaning trial, and the complications. Before and during the weaning trial, we recorded the ICP at 1-hour intervals to calculate the mean ICP, delta ICP, and ICP burden, which was defined as the area under the ICP curve. There were significant between-group differences in the age, surgery types, and intensive care unit days (p=0.045, p=0.028, and p=0.004, respectively). During the weaning trial, 28 (75.7%) patients had an increased ICP. Although there was no significant difference in the mean ICP before and during the weaning trial, the delta ICP was higher in the unfavorable outcome group (p=0.001). Moreover, patients who experienced death and hydrocephalus had a higher ICP burden, which was above 20 mmHg (p=0.016). Receiver operating characteristic analyses demonstrated the predictive ability of these variables (area under the curve AUC=0.818 [p=0.002] for delta ICP and AUC=0.758 [p=0.038] for ICP burden>20 mmHg). ICP elevation is common during EVD weaning trials in patients with TBI. ICP-related parameters, including delta ICP and ICP burden, are significant outcome predictors. There is a need for larger prospective studies to further explore the relationship between ICP during EVD weaning trials and TBI outcomes.

scholarly journals Neurosurgical intervention in patients with mild traumatic brain injury and its effect on neurological outcomes

2016 ◽  
Vol 124 (2) ◽  
pp. 538-545 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin James Tierney ◽  
Natasha V. Nayak ◽  
Charles J. Prestigiacomo ◽  
Ziad C. Sifri
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Mild Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Nonoperative Management ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Clinical Predictors ◽  
Neurological Outcomes ◽  
Cranial Ct ◽  
Delayed Intervention ◽  
Neurosurgical Intervention

OBJECT The object of this study was to determine the mortality and neurological outcome of patients with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) who require neurosurgical intervention (NSI), identify clinical predictors of a poor outcome, and investigate the effect of failed nonoperative management and delayed NSI on outcome. METHODS A cross-sectional study of 10 years was performed, capturing all adults with mTBI and NSI. Primary outcome variables were mortality and Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) score. Patients were divided into an immediate intervention group, which received an NSI after the initial cranial CT scan, and a delayed intervention group, which had failed nonoperative management and received an NSI after 2 or more cranial CT scans. RESULTS The mortality rate in mTBI patients requiring NSI was 13%, and the mean GOS score was 3.6 ± 1.2. An age > 60 years was independently predictive of a worse outcome, and epidural hematoma was independently predictive of a good outcome. Logistic regression analysis using independent variables was calculated to create a model for predicting poor neurological outcomes in patients with mTBI undergoing NSI and had 74.1% accuracy. Patients in the delayed intervention group had worse mortality (25% vs 9%) and worse mean GOS scores (2.9 ± 1.3 vs 3.7 ± 1.2) than those in the immediate intervention group. CONCLUSIONS Data in this study demonstrate that patients with mTBI requiring NSI have higher mortality rates and worse neurological outcomes and should therefore be classified separately from mTBI patients not requiring NSI. Additionally, mTBI patients requiring NSI after the failure of nonoperative management have worse outcomes than those receiving immediate intervention and should be considered separately.

Effects of hypertonic saline on intracranial pressure and cerebral autoregulation in pediatric traumatic brain injury

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Julian Zipfel ◽  
Juliane Engel ◽  
Konstantin Hockel ◽  
Ellen Heimberg ◽  
Martin U. Schuhmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Intracranial Pressure ◽  
Hypertonic Saline ◽  
Pediatric Patients ◽  
Injury Severity ◽  
Primary Outcome Measure ◽  
Favorable Outcome ◽  
Outcome Group ◽  
Significant Difference

OBJECTIVE Hypertonic saline (HTS) is commonly used in children to lower intracranial pressure (ICP) after severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI). While ICP and cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) correlate moderately to TBI outcome, indices of cerebrovascular autoregulation enhance the correlation of neuromonitoring data to neurological outcome. In this study, the authors sought to investigate the effect of HTS administration on ICP, CPP, and autoregulation in pediatric patients with sTBI. METHODS Twenty-eight pediatric patients with sTBI who were intubated and sedated were included. Blood pressure and ICP were actively managed according to the autoregulation index PRx (pressure relativity index to determine and maintain an optimal CPP [CPPopt]). In cases in which ICP was continuously > 20 mm Hg despite all other measures to decrease it, an infusion of 3% HTS was administered. The monitoring data of the first 6 hours after HTS administration were analyzed. The Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) score at the 3-month follow-up was used as the primary outcome measure, and patients were dichotomized into favorable (GOS score 4 or 5) and unfavorable (GOS score 1–3) groups. RESULTS The mean dose of HTS was 40 ml 3% NaCl. No significant difference in ICP and PRx was seen between groups at the HTS administration. ICP was lowered significantly in all children, with the effect lasting as long as 6 hours. The lowering of ICP was significantly greater and longer in children with a favorable outcome (p < 0.001); only this group showed significant improvement of autoregulatory capacity (p = 0.048). A newly established HTS response index clearly separated the outcome groups. CONCLUSIONS HTS significantly lowered ICP in all children after sTBI. This effect was significantly greater and longer-lasting in children with a favorable outcome. Moreover, HTS administration restored disturbed autoregulation only in the favorable outcome group. This highlights the role of a “rescuable” autoregulation regarding outcome, which might be a possible indicator of injury severity. The effect of HTS on autoregulation and other possible mechanisms should be further investigated.

Intracranial Pressure Waveform Morphology and Intracranial Adaptive Capacity

2008 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 545-554 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jun-Yu Fan ◽  
Catherine Kirkness ◽  
Paolo Vicini ◽  
Robert Burr ◽  
Pamela Mitchell
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Intracranial Pressure ◽  
Adaptive Capacity ◽  
Severe Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Pressure Monitor ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Prime Concern ◽  
Intracranial Pressure Waveform

Background Intracranial hypertension due to primary and secondary injuries is a prime concern when providing care to patients with severe traumatic brain injury. Increases in intracranial pressure vary depending on compensatory processes within the craniospinal space, also referred to as intracranial adaptive capacity. In patients with traumatic brain injury and decreased intracranial adaptive capacity, intracranial pressure increases disproportionately in response to a variety of stimuli. However, no well-validated measures are available in clinical practice to predict the development of such an increase. Objectives To examine whether P2 elevation, quantified by determining the P2:P1 ratio (=0.8) of the intracranial pressure pulse waveform, is a unique predictor of disproportionate increases in intracranial pressure on a beat-by-beat basis in the 30 minutes preceding the elevation in patients with severe traumatic brain injury, within 48 hours after deployment of an intracranial pressure monitor. Methods A total of 38 patients with severe traumatic brain injury were sampled from a randomized controlled trial of cerebral perfusion pressure management in patients with traumatic brain injury or subarachnoid hemorrhage. Results The P2 elevation was not only present before the disproportionate increase in pressure, but also appeared in the comparison data set (within-subject without such a pressure increase). Conclusions P2 elevation is not a reliable clinical indicator to predict an impending disproportionate increase in intracranial pressure.

Statewide Trends in Intracranial Pressure Monitor Use in 36,915 Patients with Severe Traumatic Brain Injury in a Mature Trauma System over the Past 18 Years

2019 ◽  
Vol 130 ◽  
pp. e166-e171 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikolaos Mouchtouris ◽  
Justin Turpin ◽  
Nohra Chalouhi ◽  
Fadi Al Saiegh ◽  
Thana Theofanis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Intracranial Pressure ◽  
Severe Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Trauma System ◽  
Pressure Monitor ◽  
The Past

Effectiveness of ketamine in decreasing intracranial pressure in children with intracranial hypertension

2009 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gad Bar-Joseph ◽  
Yoav Guilburd ◽  
Ada Tamir ◽  
Joseph N. Guilburd
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Intracranial Pressure ◽  
Intracranial Hypertension ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Decrease Blood Pressure ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

Object Deepening sedation is often needed in patients with intracranial hypertension. All widely used sedative and anesthetic agents (opioids, benzodiazepines, propofol, and barbiturates) decrease blood pressure and may therefore decrease cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP). Ketamine is a potent, safe, rapid-onset anesthetic agent that does not decrease blood pressure. However, ketamine's use in patients with traumatic brain injury and intracranial hypertension is precluded because it is widely stated that it increases intracranial pressure (ICP). Based on anecdotal clinical experience, the authors hypothesized that ketamine does not increase—but may rather decrease—ICP. Methods The authors conducted a prospective, controlled, clinical trial of data obtained in a pediatric intensive care unit of a regional trauma center. All patients were sedated and mechanically ventilated prior to inclusion in the study. Children with sustained, elevated ICP (> 18 mm Hg) resistant to first-tier therapies received a single ketamine dose (1–1.5 mg/kg) either to prevent further ICP increase during a potentially distressing intervention (Group 1) or as an additional measure to lower ICP (Group 2). Hemodynamic, ICP, and CPP values were recorded before ketamine administration, and repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to compare these values with those recorded every minute for 10 minutes following ketamine administration. Results The results of 82 ketamine administrations in 30 patients were analyzed. Overall, following ketamine administration, ICP decreased by 30% (from 25.8 ± 8.4 to 18.0 ± 8.5 mm Hg) (p < 0.001) and CPP increased from 54.4 ± 11.7 to 58.3 ± 13.4 mm Hg (p < 0.005). In Group 1, ICP decreased significantly following ketamine administration and increased by > 2 mm Hg during the distressing intervention in only 1 of 17 events. In Group 2, when ketamine was administered to lower persistent intracranial hypertension, ICP decreased by 33% (from 26.0 ± 9.1 to 17.5 ± 9.1 mm Hg) (p < 0.0001) following ketamine administration. Conclusions In ventilation-treated patients with intracranial hypertension, ketamine effectively decreased ICP and prevented untoward ICP elevations during potentially distressing interventions, without lowering blood pressure and CPP. These results refute the notion that ketamine increases ICP. Ketamine is a safe and effective drug for patients with traumatic brain injury and intracranial hypertension, and it can possibly be used safely in trauma emergency situations.

Management of traumatic brain injury

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alistair A. Gibson ◽  
Peter J. D. Andrews
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Intracranial Pressure ◽  
External Ventricular Drain ◽  
Young Male ◽  
Blocking Agent ◽  
Neuromuscular Blocking ◽  
Moderate Hypothermia ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Thromboembolism Prophylaxis

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading cause of death and disability worldwide and although young male adults are at particular risk, it affects all ages. TBI often occurs in the presence of significant extracranial injuries and immediate management focuses on the ABCs—airway with cervical spine control, breathing, and circulation. Best outcomes are achieved by management in centres that can offer comprehensive neurological critical care and appropriate management for extracranial injuries. If patients require transfer from an admitting hospital to a specialist centre, the transfer must be carried out by an appropriately skilled and equipped transport team. The focus of specific TBI management is on the avoidance of secondary injury to the brain. The principles of management are to avoid hypotension and hypoxia, control intracranial pressure and maintain cerebral perfusion pressure above 60 mmHg. Management of increased intracranial pressure is generally by a stepwise approach starting with sedation and analgesia, lung protective mechanical ventilation to normocarbia in a 30° head-up position, maintenance of oxygenation, and blood pressure. Additional measures include paralysis with a neuromuscular blocking agent, CSF drainage via an external ventricular drain, osmolar therapy with mannitol or hypertonic saline, and moderate hypothermia. Refractory intracranial hypertension may be treated surgically with decompressive craniectomy or medically with high dose barbiturate sedation. General supportive measures include provision of adequate nutrition preferably by the enteral route, thromboembolism prophylaxis, skin and bowel care, and management of all extracranial injuries.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document