A Retrospective Analysis of Intracranial Pressure Monitoring and Outcomes in Adults after Severe Traumatic Brain Injury at Kaiser Permanente Trauma Centers.


Journal

The Permanente journal
ISSN: 1552-5775
Titre abrégé: Perm J
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9800474

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
19 05 2021
Historique:
received: 02 11 2020
accepted: 01 03 2021
entrez: 29 3 2022
pubmed: 30 3 2022
medline: 5 4 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The role of intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring in improving outcomes after severe traumatic brain injury especially at level II trauma centers remains controversial. A retrospective analysis was undertaken to assess the impact of ICP monitoring on mortality and long-term functional outcome in adults after severe traumatic brain injury at level II trauma centers. The data were extracted from the Kaiser Permanente trauma database. Inclusion criteria were adults (≥ 18 years) with severe traumatic brain injury (Glasgow Coma Scale score, < 9) admitted to 2 level II trauma centers in Northern California from 2014 to 2019. Of 199 patients, 58 (29.1%) underwent ICP monitoring. The monitored subgroup was significantly younger (< 65 years), had lower Glasgow Coma Scale scores (3-5), underwent cranial procedures (craniotomy or decompressive craniectomy) more often, and had greater injury severity scores (≥ 15). Despite monitored patients being more severely injured, there was no significant difference in mortality or 6-month favorable outcomes between monitored and nonmonitored patients, including patients who underwent cranial procedures. Increased monitoring frequency and reduction in overall mortality was seen throughout the study period yet with a parallel reduction in both groups. ICP monitoring may not impact in-patient mortality or long-term outcomes at level II trauma centers. Improved outcomes may be more related to identifying patients who may benefit from ICP-guided therapy rather than simply increasing the overall use of it. Last, our pattern of care and outcomes are comparable to level I trauma centers and our findings may serve as a benchmark for future studies.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
The role of intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring in improving outcomes after severe traumatic brain injury especially at level II trauma centers remains controversial. A retrospective analysis was undertaken to assess the impact of ICP monitoring on mortality and long-term functional outcome in adults after severe traumatic brain injury at level II trauma centers.
METHODS
The data were extracted from the Kaiser Permanente trauma database. Inclusion criteria were adults (≥ 18 years) with severe traumatic brain injury (Glasgow Coma Scale score, < 9) admitted to 2 level II trauma centers in Northern California from 2014 to 2019.
RESULTS
Of 199 patients, 58 (29.1%) underwent ICP monitoring. The monitored subgroup was significantly younger (< 65 years), had lower Glasgow Coma Scale scores (3-5), underwent cranial procedures (craniotomy or decompressive craniectomy) more often, and had greater injury severity scores (≥ 15). Despite monitored patients being more severely injured, there was no significant difference in mortality or 6-month favorable outcomes between monitored and nonmonitored patients, including patients who underwent cranial procedures. Increased monitoring frequency and reduction in overall mortality was seen throughout the study period yet with a parallel reduction in both groups.
CONCLUSION
ICP monitoring may not impact in-patient mortality or long-term outcomes at level II trauma centers. Improved outcomes may be more related to identifying patients who may benefit from ICP-guided therapy rather than simply increasing the overall use of it. Last, our pattern of care and outcomes are comparable to level I trauma centers and our findings may serve as a benchmark for future studies.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35348072
doi: 10.7812/TPP/20.293
pmc: PMC8817930
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Références

J Neurosurg. 1977 Oct;47(4):503-16
pubmed: 903804
PLoS One. 2014 Feb 21;9(2):e87432
pubmed: 24586276
Bull Emerg Trauma. 2014 Oct;2(4):151-5
pubmed: 27162888
J Neurotrauma. 2019 Apr 1;36(7):988-995
pubmed: 30251919
Neurocrit Care. 2012 Apr;16(2):258-66
pubmed: 21964774
Injury. 2017 Sep;48(9):1944-1950
pubmed: 28495204
Arq Neuropsiquiatr. 1995 Sep;53(3-A):390-4
pubmed: 8540811
World J Surg. 2017 Jun;41(6):1543-1549
pubmed: 28188356
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2018 Jun;160(6):1291-1299
pubmed: 29696505
World Neurosurg. 2015 May;83(5):794-800
pubmed: 25541084
Neurocrit Care. 2006;4(1):8-13
pubmed: 16498188
Am J Surg. 2015 Dec;210(6):1082-6; discussion 1086-7
pubmed: 26482513
J Emerg Trauma Shock. 2019 Jan-Mar;12(1):18-22
pubmed: 31057279
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2015 Mar;78(3):492-501; discussion 501-2
pubmed: 25710418
World Neurosurg. 2020 Apr;136:e535-e541
pubmed: 31954892
Am Surg. 2011 Mar;77(3):277-80
pubmed: 21375836
J Neurosurg. 2015 Mar;122(3):574-87
pubmed: 25479125
J Neurosurg. 2011 May;114(5):1471-8
pubmed: 21214327
J Trauma. 2007 Dec;63(6):1271-8
pubmed: 18212649
Arch Surg. 2008 Dec;143(12):1213-7; discussion 1217
pubmed: 19075174
J Trauma. 2011 Jun;70(6):1354-7
pubmed: 21817972
NeuroRehabilitation. 2007;22(5):341-53
pubmed: 18162698
World Neurosurg. 2019 Oct;130:e166-e171
pubmed: 31203067
Neurosurgery. 2020 Jan 1;86(1):107-111
pubmed: 30690608
Neurosurgery. 2016 Mar;78(3):361-8; discussion 368-9
pubmed: 26891376
J Neurosurg. 2012 Oct;117(4):729-34
pubmed: 22900846
Handb Clin Neurol. 2015;127:3-13
pubmed: 25702206
N Engl J Med. 2012 Dec 27;367(26):2471-81
pubmed: 23234472
Neurosurgery. 2019 Aug 1;85(2):231-239
pubmed: 30053135
J Neurosurg. 2018 Dec 21;131(6):1896-1904
pubmed: 30579278
Intensive Care Med. 2008 Mar;34(3):461-7
pubmed: 18066523
Am Surg. 2012 Oct;78(10):1166-71
pubmed: 23025964
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2015 May;1345:74-82
pubmed: 25048398
Intensive Care Med. 2015 Jun;41(6):1067-76
pubmed: 25894624
Acta Psychiatr Scand Suppl. 1960;36(149):1-193
pubmed: 13764297
J Am Coll Surg. 2006 Feb;202(2):212-5; quiz A45
pubmed: 16427544
Neurosurgery. 2017 Jan 01;80(1):6-15
pubmed: 27654000
J Neurosurg. 1987 Nov;67(5):648-56
pubmed: 3668633
J Trauma. 2010 Jul;69(1):110-8
pubmed: 20038855
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2017 Apr;159(4):615-622
pubmed: 28236181

Auteurs

Kaveh Barami (K)

Department of Neurosurgery, Kaiser Vacaville, Vacaville, CA.

Jessica Pemberton (J)

Department of Trauma Surgery, Kaiser Vacaville, Vacaville, CA.

Amit Banerjee (A)

Department of Neurosurgery, Kaiser Sacramento, Sacramento, CA.

Jason London (J)

Department of Trauma Surgery, Kaiser South Sacramento, Sacramento, CA.

William Bandy (W)

Department of Trauma Surgery, Kaiser Vacaville, Vacaville, CA.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH