Cargando…

Association Between the Cerebral Autoregulation Index (Pressure Reactivity), Patient’s Clinical Outcome, and Quality of ABP(t) and ICP(t) Signals for CA Monitoring

Background and Objectives: The aim of this study was to explore the association between the cerebral autoregulation (CA) index, the pressure reactivity index (PRx), the patient’s clinical outcome, and the quality of arterial blood pressure (ABP(t)) and intracranial blood pressure (ICP(t)) signals by...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bajpai, Basant K., Preiksaitis, Aidanas, Vosylius, Saulius, Rocka, Saulius
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7143400/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32245122
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina56030143
_version_ 1783519603332218880
author Bajpai, Basant K.
Preiksaitis, Aidanas
Vosylius, Saulius
Rocka, Saulius
author_facet Bajpai, Basant K.
Preiksaitis, Aidanas
Vosylius, Saulius
Rocka, Saulius
author_sort Bajpai, Basant K.
collection PubMed
description Background and Objectives: The aim of this study was to explore the association between the cerebral autoregulation (CA) index, the pressure reactivity index (PRx), the patient’s clinical outcome, and the quality of arterial blood pressure (ABP(t)) and intracranial blood pressure (ICP(t)) signals by comparing two filtering methods to derive the PRx. Materials and Methods: Data from 60 traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients were collected. Moving averaging and FIR (Finite Impulse Response) filtering were performed on the ABP(t) and ICP(t) signals, and the PRx was estimated from both filtered datasets. Sensitivity, specificity, and receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves with the area under the curves (AUCs) were determined using patient outcomes as a reference. The outcome chosen for comparison among the two filtering methods were mortality and survival. Results: The FIR filtering approach, compared with clinical outcome, had a sensitivity of 70%, a specificity of 81%, and a level of significance p = 0.001 with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.78. The moving average filtering method compared with the clinical outcome had a sensitivity of 58%, a specificity of 72%, and a level of significance p = 0.054, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.66. Conclusions: The FIR (optimal) filtering approach was found to be more sensitive for discriminating between two clinical outcomes, namely intact (survival) and impaired (death) cerebral autoregulation for TBI treatment decision making.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7143400
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-71434002020-04-14 Association Between the Cerebral Autoregulation Index (Pressure Reactivity), Patient’s Clinical Outcome, and Quality of ABP(t) and ICP(t) Signals for CA Monitoring Bajpai, Basant K. Preiksaitis, Aidanas Vosylius, Saulius Rocka, Saulius Medicina (Kaunas) Article Background and Objectives: The aim of this study was to explore the association between the cerebral autoregulation (CA) index, the pressure reactivity index (PRx), the patient’s clinical outcome, and the quality of arterial blood pressure (ABP(t)) and intracranial blood pressure (ICP(t)) signals by comparing two filtering methods to derive the PRx. Materials and Methods: Data from 60 traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients were collected. Moving averaging and FIR (Finite Impulse Response) filtering were performed on the ABP(t) and ICP(t) signals, and the PRx was estimated from both filtered datasets. Sensitivity, specificity, and receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves with the area under the curves (AUCs) were determined using patient outcomes as a reference. The outcome chosen for comparison among the two filtering methods were mortality and survival. Results: The FIR filtering approach, compared with clinical outcome, had a sensitivity of 70%, a specificity of 81%, and a level of significance p = 0.001 with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.78. The moving average filtering method compared with the clinical outcome had a sensitivity of 58%, a specificity of 72%, and a level of significance p = 0.054, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.66. Conclusions: The FIR (optimal) filtering approach was found to be more sensitive for discriminating between two clinical outcomes, namely intact (survival) and impaired (death) cerebral autoregulation for TBI treatment decision making. MDPI 2020-03-20 /pmc/articles/PMC7143400/ /pubmed/32245122 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina56030143 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Bajpai, Basant K.
Preiksaitis, Aidanas
Vosylius, Saulius
Rocka, Saulius
Association Between the Cerebral Autoregulation Index (Pressure Reactivity), Patient’s Clinical Outcome, and Quality of ABP(t) and ICP(t) Signals for CA Monitoring
title Association Between the Cerebral Autoregulation Index (Pressure Reactivity), Patient’s Clinical Outcome, and Quality of ABP(t) and ICP(t) Signals for CA Monitoring
title_full Association Between the Cerebral Autoregulation Index (Pressure Reactivity), Patient’s Clinical Outcome, and Quality of ABP(t) and ICP(t) Signals for CA Monitoring
title_fullStr Association Between the Cerebral Autoregulation Index (Pressure Reactivity), Patient’s Clinical Outcome, and Quality of ABP(t) and ICP(t) Signals for CA Monitoring
title_full_unstemmed Association Between the Cerebral Autoregulation Index (Pressure Reactivity), Patient’s Clinical Outcome, and Quality of ABP(t) and ICP(t) Signals for CA Monitoring
title_short Association Between the Cerebral Autoregulation Index (Pressure Reactivity), Patient’s Clinical Outcome, and Quality of ABP(t) and ICP(t) Signals for CA Monitoring
title_sort association between the cerebral autoregulation index (pressure reactivity), patient’s clinical outcome, and quality of abp(t) and icp(t) signals for ca monitoring
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7143400/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32245122
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina56030143
work_keys_str_mv AT bajpaibasantk associationbetweenthecerebralautoregulationindexpressurereactivitypatientsclinicaloutcomeandqualityofabptandicptsignalsforcamonitoring
AT preiksaitisaidanas associationbetweenthecerebralautoregulationindexpressurereactivitypatientsclinicaloutcomeandqualityofabptandicptsignalsforcamonitoring
AT vosyliussaulius associationbetweenthecerebralautoregulationindexpressurereactivitypatientsclinicaloutcomeandqualityofabptandicptsignalsforcamonitoring
AT rockasaulius associationbetweenthecerebralautoregulationindexpressurereactivitypatientsclinicaloutcomeandqualityofabptandicptsignalsforcamonitoring