Cargando…
Accuracy of intracranial pressure monitoring: systematic review and meta-analysis
INTRODUCTION: Intracranial pressure (ICP) measurement is used to tailor interventions and to assist in formulating the prognosis for traumatic brain injury patients. Accurate data are therefore essential. The aim of this study was to verify the accuracy of ICP monitoring systems on the basis of a li...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4667503/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26627204 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-015-1137-9 |
_version_ | 1782403842095185920 |
---|---|
author | Zacchetti, Lucia Magnoni, Sandra Di Corte, Federica Zanier, Elisa R. Stocchetti, Nino |
author_facet | Zacchetti, Lucia Magnoni, Sandra Di Corte, Federica Zanier, Elisa R. Stocchetti, Nino |
author_sort | Zacchetti, Lucia |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Intracranial pressure (ICP) measurement is used to tailor interventions and to assist in formulating the prognosis for traumatic brain injury patients. Accurate data are therefore essential. The aim of this study was to verify the accuracy of ICP monitoring systems on the basis of a literature review. METHODS: A PubMed search was conducted from 1982 to 2014, plus additional references from the selected papers. Accuracy was defined as the degree of correspondence between the pressure read by the catheter and a reference “real” ICP measurement. Studies comparing simultaneous readings from at least two catheters were included. Drift was defined as the loss of accuracy over the monitoring period. Meta-analyses of data from the studies were used to estimate the overall mean difference between simultaneous ICP measurements and their variability. Individual studies were weighted using both a fixed and a random effects model. RESULTS: Of 163 articles screened, 83 compared two intracranial catheters: 64 reported accuracy and 37 drift (some reported both). Of these, 10 and 17, respectively, fulfilled the inclusion criteria for accuracy and zero drift analysis. The combined mean differences between probes were 1.5 mmHg (95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.7–2.3) with the random effects model and 1.6 mmHg (95 % CI 1.3–1.9) with the fixed effects model. The reported mean drift over a long observation period was 0.75 mmHg. No relation was found with the duration of monitoring or differences between various probes. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that the average error between ICP measures is clinically negligible. The random effects model, however, indicates that a high percentage of readings may vary over a wide range, with clinical implications both for future comparison studies and for daily care. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4667503 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-46675032015-12-03 Accuracy of intracranial pressure monitoring: systematic review and meta-analysis Zacchetti, Lucia Magnoni, Sandra Di Corte, Federica Zanier, Elisa R. Stocchetti, Nino Crit Care Research INTRODUCTION: Intracranial pressure (ICP) measurement is used to tailor interventions and to assist in formulating the prognosis for traumatic brain injury patients. Accurate data are therefore essential. The aim of this study was to verify the accuracy of ICP monitoring systems on the basis of a literature review. METHODS: A PubMed search was conducted from 1982 to 2014, plus additional references from the selected papers. Accuracy was defined as the degree of correspondence between the pressure read by the catheter and a reference “real” ICP measurement. Studies comparing simultaneous readings from at least two catheters were included. Drift was defined as the loss of accuracy over the monitoring period. Meta-analyses of data from the studies were used to estimate the overall mean difference between simultaneous ICP measurements and their variability. Individual studies were weighted using both a fixed and a random effects model. RESULTS: Of 163 articles screened, 83 compared two intracranial catheters: 64 reported accuracy and 37 drift (some reported both). Of these, 10 and 17, respectively, fulfilled the inclusion criteria for accuracy and zero drift analysis. The combined mean differences between probes were 1.5 mmHg (95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.7–2.3) with the random effects model and 1.6 mmHg (95 % CI 1.3–1.9) with the fixed effects model. The reported mean drift over a long observation period was 0.75 mmHg. No relation was found with the duration of monitoring or differences between various probes. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that the average error between ICP measures is clinically negligible. The random effects model, however, indicates that a high percentage of readings may vary over a wide range, with clinical implications both for future comparison studies and for daily care. BioMed Central 2015-12-02 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4667503/ /pubmed/26627204 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-015-1137-9 Text en © Zacchetti et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Zacchetti, Lucia Magnoni, Sandra Di Corte, Federica Zanier, Elisa R. Stocchetti, Nino Accuracy of intracranial pressure monitoring: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Accuracy of intracranial pressure monitoring: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Accuracy of intracranial pressure monitoring: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Accuracy of intracranial pressure monitoring: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Accuracy of intracranial pressure monitoring: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Accuracy of intracranial pressure monitoring: systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | accuracy of intracranial pressure monitoring: systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4667503/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26627204 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-015-1137-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zacchettilucia accuracyofintracranialpressuremonitoringsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT magnonisandra accuracyofintracranialpressuremonitoringsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT dicortefederica accuracyofintracranialpressuremonitoringsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT zanierelisar accuracyofintracranialpressuremonitoringsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT stocchettinino accuracyofintracranialpressuremonitoringsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |