A trial of intracranial pressure monitoring in traumatic brain injury.
BACKGROUND
Intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring is considered the standard of care for severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) and is used frequently, but the efficacy of treatment based on monitoring in improving the outcome has not been rigorously assessed.


METHODS



OBJECTIVE
The objective was to compare efficacy of guideline-based management in which a protocol for monitoring intraparenchymal ICP was used (ICP group) or a protocol in which treatment was based on imaging and clinical examination (exam group).


METHODS
A multicenter randomized controlled trial was conducted.


METHODS
The trial was set in ICUs in Bolivia or Ecuador.


METHODS
Patients had severe TBI (n = 324) and were 13 years of age or older.


METHODS
Patients were randomly allocated to ICP monitoring or clinical exam-based monitoring.


RESULTS
The primary outcome was a composite of survival time, impaired consciousness, functional status at 3 and 6 months, and neuropsychological status at 6 months; neuropsychological status was assessed by an examiner who was unaware of the protocol assignment. This composite measure was based on performance across 21 measures of functional and cognitive status and was calculated as a percentile (with 0 indicating the worst performance, and 100 the best performance).


RESULTS
There was no significant between-group difference in the primary outcome, a composite measure based on percentile performance across 21 measures of functional and cognitive status (score 56 in the pressure-monitoring group versus 53 in the imaging-clinical examination group; P = 0.49). Six-month mortality rates were 39% in the pressure-monitoring group and 41% in the imaging-clinical examination group (P = 0.60). The median lengths of stay in the ICU were similar in the two groups (12 days in the pressure-monitoring group and 9 days in the imaging-clinical examination group; P = 0.25), although the number of days of brain-specific treatments (for example, administration of hyperosmolar fluids and the use of hyperventilation) in the ICU was higher in the imaging-clinical examination group than in the pressure-monitoring group (4.8 versus 3.4, P = 0.002). The distributions of serious adverse events were similar in the two groups.


CONCLUSIONS
For patients with severe TBI, care focused on maintaining monitored ICP at 20 mmHg or less was not shown to be superior to care based on imaging and clinical examination.
Samer
S
Melhem
Lori
L
Shutter
A
A
Kaynar
D001921:Brain / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D001930:Brain Injuries / Q000503:physiopathology*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D019586:Intracranial Hypertension / Q000175:diagnosis*; D007427:Intracranial Pressure; D008297:Male; D008991:Monitoring, Physiologic; D009460:Neurologic Examination; D011859:Radiography