Outcomes, Time-Trends, and Factors Associated With Ancillary Study Use for the Determination of Brain Death.
Journal
Critical care medicine
ISSN: 1530-0293
Titre abrégé: Crit Care Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0355501
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 09 2021
01 09 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
15
4
2021
medline:
29
9
2021
entrez:
14
4
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Brain death determination often requires ancillary studies when clinical determination cannot be fully or safely completed. We aimed to analyze the results of ancillary studies, the factors associated with ancillary study performance, and the changes over time in number of studies performed at an academic health system. Retrospective cohort. Multihospital academic health system. Consecutive adult patients declared brain dead between 2010 and 2020. None. Of 140 brain death patients, ancillary studies were performed in 84 (60%). The false negative rate of all ancillary studies was 4% (5% of transcranial Doppler ultrasounds, 4% of nuclear studies, 0% of electroencephalograms, and 17% of CT angiography). In univariate analysis, ancillary study use was associated with female sex (odds ratio, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.21-5.01; p = 0.013) and the etiology of brain death being hypoxic-ischemic brain injury (odds ratio, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.43-5.88; p = 0.003), nontraumatic intracranial hemorrhage (odds ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.21-0.96; p = 0.039), or traumatic brain injury (odds ratio, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.04-0.8; p = 0.031). In multivariable analysis, female sex (odds ratio, 5.7; 95% CI, 2.56-15.86; p = 0.004), the etiology of brain death being hypoxic-ischemic brain injury (odds ratio, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.3-8.8; p = 0.015), and the neurologists performing brain death declaration (odds ratio, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.004-0.64; p = 0.034) were factors independently associated with use of ancillary studies. Over the study period, the total number of ancillary studies performed each year did not significantly change; however, the number of electroencephalograms significantly decreased with time (odds ratio per 1-yr increase, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.49-0.90; p = 0.014). A large number of ancillary studies were performed despite a clinical determination of brain death; patients with hypoxic-ischemic brain injury are more likely to undergo ancillary studies for brain death determination, and neurologists were less likely to use ancillary studies for brain death. Recently, the use of electroencephalograms for brain death determination has decreased, likely reflecting significant concerns regarding its validity and reliability.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33852444
doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000005035
pii: 00003246-202109000-00028
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e840-e848Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest.
Références
Wijdicks EF, Varelas PN, Gronseth GS, et al.; American Academy of Neurology: Evidence-based guideline update: Determining brain death in adults: Report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology 2010; 74:1911–1918
Greer DM, Wang HH, Robinson JD, et al.: Variability of brain death policies in the United States. JAMA Neurol 2016; 73:213–218
Greer DM, Shemie SD, Lewis A, et al.: Determination of brain death/death by neurologic criteria: The world brain death project. JAMA 2020; 324:1078–1097
Wijdicks EF: Pitfalls and slip-ups in brain death determination. Neurol Res 2013; 35:169–173
Greer DM, Strozyk D, Schwamm LH: False positive CT angiography in brain death. Neurocrit Care 2009; 11:272–275
Lewis A, Bakkar A, Kreiger-Benson E, et al.: Determination of death by neurologic criteria around the world. Neurology 2020; 95:e299–e309
Braksick SA, Robinson CP, Gronseth GS, et al.: Variability in reported physician practices for brain death determination. Neurology 2019; 92:e888–e894
Sayan HE: Retrospective analysis of the apnea test and ancillary test in determining brain death. Rev Bras Ter Intensiva 2020; 32:405–411
Escudero D, Valentín MO, Escalante JL, et al.: Intensive care practices in brain death diagnosis and organ donation. Anaesthesia 2015; 70:1130–1139
Monteiro LM, Bollen CW, van Huffelen AC, et al.: Transcranial Doppler ultrasonography to confirm brain death: A meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med 2006; 32:1937–1944
Joffe AR, Lequier L, Cave D: Specificity of radionuclide brain blood flow testing in brain death: Case report and review. J Intensive Care Med 2010; 25:53–64
Kramer AH, Roberts DJ: Computed tomography angiography in the diagnosis of brain death: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurocrit Care 2014; 21:539–550
Fernández-Torre JL, Hernández-Hernández MA, Muñoz-Esteban C: Non confirmatory electroencephalography in patients meeting clinical criteria for brain death: Scenario and impact on organ donation. Clin Neurophysiol 2013; 124:2362–2367
MacDougall BJ, Robinson JD, Kappus L, et al.: Simulation-based training in brain death determination. Neurocrit Care 2014; 21:383–391
Escalante JL, Escudero MD, Nolla MGrupo de Trabajo de Trasplantes de la SEMICYUC: Diagnóstico de Muerte Encefálica. Estudio multicéntrico. Revista Portuguesa de Medicina Intensiva 1998; 7:107
Li Y, Liu S, Xun F, et al.: Use of transcranial Doppler ultrasound for diagnosis of brain death in patients with severe cerebral injury. Med Sci Monit 2016; 22:1910–1915
Chang JJ, Tsivgoulis G, Katsanos AH, et al.: Diagnostic accuracy of transcranial Doppler for brain death confirmation: Systematic review and meta-analysis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016; 37:408–414
Alexandrov AV, Sloan MA, Tegeler CH, et al.; American Society of Neuroimaging Practice Guidelines Committee: Practice standards for transcranial Doppler (TCD) ultrasound. Part II. Clinical indications and expected outcomes. J Neuroimaging 2012; 22:215–224