Background: Compensatory-reserve-weighted intracranial pressure (wICP) has recently been suggested as a supplementary measure of intracranial pressure (ICP) in adult traumatic brain injury (TBI), with a single-center study suggesting an association with mortality at 6 months. No multi-center studies exist to validate this relationship. The goal was to compare wICP to ICP for association with outcome in a multi-center TBI cohort. Methods: Using the Collaborative European Neuro Trauma Effectiveness Research in TBI (CENTER-TBI) high-resolution intensive care unit (ICU) cohort, we derived ICP and wICP (calculated as wICP = (1 − RAP) × ICP; where RAP is the compensatory reserve index derived from the moving correlation between pulse amplitude of ICP and ICP). Various univariate logistic regression models were created comparing ICP and wICP to dichotomized outcome at 6 to 12 months, based on Glasgow Outcome Score—Extended (GOSE) (alive/dead—GOSE ≥ 2/GOSE = 1; favorable/unfavorable—GOSE 5 to 8/GOSE 1 to 4, respectively). Models were compared using area under the receiver operating curves (AUC) and p values. Results: wICP displayed higher AUC compared to ICP on univariate regression for alive/dead outcome compared to mean ICP (AUC 0.712, 95% CI 0.615–0.810, p = 0.0002, and AUC 0.642, 95% CI 0.538–746, p < 0.0001, respectively; no significant difference on Delong’s test), and for favorable/unfavorable outcome (AUC 0.627, 95% CI 0.548–0.705, p = 0.015, and AUC 0.495, 95% CI 0.413–0.577, p = 0.059; significantly different using Delong’s test p = 0.002), with lower wICP values associated with improved outcomes (p < 0.05 for both). These relationships on univariate analysis held true even when comparing the wICP models with those containing both ICP and RAP integrated area under the curve over time (p < 0.05 for all via Delong’s test). Conclusions: Compensatory-reserve-weighted ICP displays superior outcome association for both alive/dead and favorable/unfavorable dichotomized outcomes in adult TBI, through univariate analysis. Lower wICP is associated with better global outcomes. The results of this study provide multi-center validation of those seen in a previous single-center study.

Zeiler, F., Ercole, A., Cabeleira, M., Beqiri, E., Zoerle, T., Carbonara, M., et al. (2019). Compensatory-reserve-weighted intracranial pressure versus intracranial pressure for outcome association in adult traumatic brain injury: a CENTER-TBI validation study. ACTA NEUROCHIRURGICA, 161(7), 1275-1284 [10.1007/s00701-019-03915-3].

Compensatory-reserve-weighted intracranial pressure versus intracranial pressure for outcome association in adult traumatic brain injury: a CENTER-TBI validation study

Chieregato A.;Citerio G.;Vargiolu A.;
2019

Abstract

Background: Compensatory-reserve-weighted intracranial pressure (wICP) has recently been suggested as a supplementary measure of intracranial pressure (ICP) in adult traumatic brain injury (TBI), with a single-center study suggesting an association with mortality at 6 months. No multi-center studies exist to validate this relationship. The goal was to compare wICP to ICP for association with outcome in a multi-center TBI cohort. Methods: Using the Collaborative European Neuro Trauma Effectiveness Research in TBI (CENTER-TBI) high-resolution intensive care unit (ICU) cohort, we derived ICP and wICP (calculated as wICP = (1 − RAP) × ICP; where RAP is the compensatory reserve index derived from the moving correlation between pulse amplitude of ICP and ICP). Various univariate logistic regression models were created comparing ICP and wICP to dichotomized outcome at 6 to 12 months, based on Glasgow Outcome Score—Extended (GOSE) (alive/dead—GOSE ≥ 2/GOSE = 1; favorable/unfavorable—GOSE 5 to 8/GOSE 1 to 4, respectively). Models were compared using area under the receiver operating curves (AUC) and p values. Results: wICP displayed higher AUC compared to ICP on univariate regression for alive/dead outcome compared to mean ICP (AUC 0.712, 95% CI 0.615–0.810, p = 0.0002, and AUC 0.642, 95% CI 0.538–746, p < 0.0001, respectively; no significant difference on Delong’s test), and for favorable/unfavorable outcome (AUC 0.627, 95% CI 0.548–0.705, p = 0.015, and AUC 0.495, 95% CI 0.413–0.577, p = 0.059; significantly different using Delong’s test p = 0.002), with lower wICP values associated with improved outcomes (p < 0.05 for both). These relationships on univariate analysis held true even when comparing the wICP models with those containing both ICP and RAP integrated area under the curve over time (p < 0.05 for all via Delong’s test). Conclusions: Compensatory-reserve-weighted ICP displays superior outcome association for both alive/dead and favorable/unfavorable dichotomized outcomes in adult TBI, through univariate analysis. Lower wICP is associated with better global outcomes. The results of this study provide multi-center validation of those seen in a previous single-center study.
Articolo in rivista - Articolo scientifico
Scientifica
Compensatory reserve; Intracranial pressure; Outcome; Weighted ICP;
Compensatory reserve, Intracranial pressure, Outcome, Weighted ICP
English
Zeiler, F., Ercole, A., Cabeleira, M., Beqiri, E., Zoerle, T., Carbonara, M., et al. (2019). Compensatory-reserve-weighted intracranial pressure versus intracranial pressure for outcome association in adult traumatic brain injury: a CENTER-TBI validation study. ACTA NEUROCHIRURGICA, 161(7), 1275-1284 [10.1007/s00701-019-03915-3].
Zeiler, F; Ercole, A; Cabeleira, M; Beqiri, E; Zoerle, T; Carbonara, M; Stocchetti, N; Menon, D; Smielewski, P; Czosnyka, M; Anke, A; Beer, R; Bellander, B; Buki, A; Chevallard, G; Chieregato, A; Citerio, G; Czeiter, E; Depreitere, B; Eapen, G; Frisvold, S; Helbok, R; Jankowski, S; Kondziella, D; Koskinen, L; Meyfroidt, G; Moeller, K; Nelson, D; Piippo-Karjalainen, A; Radoi, A; Ragauskas, A; Raj, R; Rhodes, J; Rocka, S; Rossaint, R; Sahuquillo, J; Sakowitz, O; Stevanovic, A; Sundstrom, N; Takala, R; Tamosuitis, T; Tenovuo, O; Vajkoczy, P; Vargiolu, A; Vilcinis, R; Wolf, S; Younsi, A
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
10281-281561.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia di allegato: Publisher’s Version (Version of Record, VoR)
Dimensione 548.22 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
548.22 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/10281/281561
Citazioni
  • Scopus 9
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 11
Social impact