Blood Clots May Compromise Intracranial Pressure Measurement Using Air-Pouch Intracranial Pressure Probes

Background: Air-pouch balloon-assisted probes have proven to be both simple and reliable tools for intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring. However, we experienced reproducible falsely high ICP measurements when the ICP probe was inserted into the intracerebral hematoma cavity. Thus, the aim of the experimental and translational study was to analyze the influence of ICP probe placement with regard to measured ICP values. Methods: Two Spiegelberg 3PN sensors were simultaneously inserted into a closed drain system and were connected to two separate ICP monitors thereby allowing for simultaneous ICP measurements. This closed system was also engineered to allow for pressure to be gradually increased in a controlled fashion. Once the pressure was verified using two identical ICP probes, one of the probes was coated with blood in an effort to replicate placement within an intraparenchymal hematoma. Pressures recorded using the coated probe and control probe were then recorded and compared across a range of 0–60 mmHg. In an effort to further the translational relevance of our results, two ICP probes were inserted in a patient that presented with a large basal ganglia hemorrhage that met criteria for ICP monitoring. One probe was inserted into the hematoma and the other into brain parenchyma; ICP values were recorded from both probes and the results compared. Results: The experimental set-up demonstrated a reliable correlation between both control ICP probes. Interestingly, the ICP probe covered with clot displayed a significantly higher average ICP value when compared to the control probe between 0 mmHg and 50 mmHg (p < 0.001); at 60 mmHg, there was no significant difference noted. Critically, this trend in discordance was even more pronounced in the clinical setting with the ICP probe placed within the hematoma cavity having reported significantly higher ICP values as compared to the probe within brain parenchyma. Conclusions: Our experimental study and clinical pilot highlight a potential pitfall in ICP measurement that may result secondary to probe placement within hematoma. Such aberrant results may lead to inappropriate interventions in an effort to address falsely elevated ICPs.