Cargando…

Comparative effectiveness of intracranial hypertension management guided by ventricular versus intraparenchymal pressure monitoring: a CENTER-TBI study

OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes between patients with primary external ventricular device (EVD)–driven treatment of intracranial hypertension and those with primary intraparenchymal monitor (IP)–driven treatment. METHODS: The CENTER-TBI study is a prospective, multicenter, longitudinal observational...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Volovici, Victor, Pisică, Dana, Gravesteijn, Benjamin Y., Dirven, Clemens M. F., Steyerberg, Ewout W., Ercole, Ari, Stocchetti, Nino, Nelson, David, Menon, David K., Citerio, Giuseppe, van der Jagt, Mathieu, Maas, Andrew I. R., Haitsma, Iain K., Lingsma, Hester F.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Vienna 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9233652/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35648213
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00701-022-05257-z
_version_ 1784735832268079104
author Volovici, Victor
Pisică, Dana
Gravesteijn, Benjamin Y.
Dirven, Clemens M. F.
Steyerberg, Ewout W.
Ercole, Ari
Stocchetti, Nino
Nelson, David
Menon, David K.
Citerio, Giuseppe
van der Jagt, Mathieu
Maas, Andrew I. R.
Haitsma, Iain K.
Lingsma, Hester F.
author_facet Volovici, Victor
Pisică, Dana
Gravesteijn, Benjamin Y.
Dirven, Clemens M. F.
Steyerberg, Ewout W.
Ercole, Ari
Stocchetti, Nino
Nelson, David
Menon, David K.
Citerio, Giuseppe
van der Jagt, Mathieu
Maas, Andrew I. R.
Haitsma, Iain K.
Lingsma, Hester F.
author_sort Volovici, Victor
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes between patients with primary external ventricular device (EVD)–driven treatment of intracranial hypertension and those with primary intraparenchymal monitor (IP)–driven treatment. METHODS: The CENTER-TBI study is a prospective, multicenter, longitudinal observational cohort study that enrolled patients of all TBI severities from 62 participating centers (mainly level I trauma centers) across Europe between 2015 and 2017. Functional outcome was assessed at 6 months and a year. We used multivariable adjusted instrumental variable (IV) analysis with “center” as instrument and logistic regression with covariate adjustment to determine the effect estimate of EVD on 6-month functional outcome. RESULTS: A total of 878 patients of all TBI severities with an indication for intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring were included in the present study, of whom 739 (84%) patients had an IP monitor and 139 (16%) an EVD. Patients included were predominantly male (74% in the IP monitor and 76% in the EVD group), with a median age of 46 years in the IP group and 48 in the EVD group. Six-month GOS-E was similar between IP and EVD patients (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) and 95% confidence interval [CI] OR 0.74 and 95% CI [0.36–1.52], adjusted IV analysis). The length of intensive care unit stay was greater in the EVD group than in the IP group (adjusted rate ratio [95% CI] 1.70 [1.34–2.12], IV analysis). One hundred eighty-seven of the 739 patients in the IP group (25%) required an EVD due to refractory ICPs. CONCLUSION: We found no major differences in outcomes of patients with TBI when comparing EVD-guided and IP monitor–guided ICP management. In our cohort, a quarter of patients that initially received an IP monitor required an EVD later for ICP control. The prevalence of complications was higher in the EVD group. PROTOCOL: The core study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02210221, and the Resource Identification Portal (RRID: SCR_015582). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00701-022-05257-z.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9233652
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer Vienna
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92336522022-06-27 Comparative effectiveness of intracranial hypertension management guided by ventricular versus intraparenchymal pressure monitoring: a CENTER-TBI study Volovici, Victor Pisică, Dana Gravesteijn, Benjamin Y. Dirven, Clemens M. F. Steyerberg, Ewout W. Ercole, Ari Stocchetti, Nino Nelson, David Menon, David K. Citerio, Giuseppe van der Jagt, Mathieu Maas, Andrew I. R. Haitsma, Iain K. Lingsma, Hester F. Acta Neurochir (Wien) Original Article - Brain trauma OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes between patients with primary external ventricular device (EVD)–driven treatment of intracranial hypertension and those with primary intraparenchymal monitor (IP)–driven treatment. METHODS: The CENTER-TBI study is a prospective, multicenter, longitudinal observational cohort study that enrolled patients of all TBI severities from 62 participating centers (mainly level I trauma centers) across Europe between 2015 and 2017. Functional outcome was assessed at 6 months and a year. We used multivariable adjusted instrumental variable (IV) analysis with “center” as instrument and logistic regression with covariate adjustment to determine the effect estimate of EVD on 6-month functional outcome. RESULTS: A total of 878 patients of all TBI severities with an indication for intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring were included in the present study, of whom 739 (84%) patients had an IP monitor and 139 (16%) an EVD. Patients included were predominantly male (74% in the IP monitor and 76% in the EVD group), with a median age of 46 years in the IP group and 48 in the EVD group. Six-month GOS-E was similar between IP and EVD patients (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) and 95% confidence interval [CI] OR 0.74 and 95% CI [0.36–1.52], adjusted IV analysis). The length of intensive care unit stay was greater in the EVD group than in the IP group (adjusted rate ratio [95% CI] 1.70 [1.34–2.12], IV analysis). One hundred eighty-seven of the 739 patients in the IP group (25%) required an EVD due to refractory ICPs. CONCLUSION: We found no major differences in outcomes of patients with TBI when comparing EVD-guided and IP monitor–guided ICP management. In our cohort, a quarter of patients that initially received an IP monitor required an EVD later for ICP control. The prevalence of complications was higher in the EVD group. PROTOCOL: The core study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02210221, and the Resource Identification Portal (RRID: SCR_015582). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00701-022-05257-z. Springer Vienna 2022-06-01 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9233652/ /pubmed/35648213 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00701-022-05257-z Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article - Brain trauma
Volovici, Victor
Pisică, Dana
Gravesteijn, Benjamin Y.
Dirven, Clemens M. F.
Steyerberg, Ewout W.
Ercole, Ari
Stocchetti, Nino
Nelson, David
Menon, David K.
Citerio, Giuseppe
van der Jagt, Mathieu
Maas, Andrew I. R.
Haitsma, Iain K.
Lingsma, Hester F.
Comparative effectiveness of intracranial hypertension management guided by ventricular versus intraparenchymal pressure monitoring: a CENTER-TBI study
title Comparative effectiveness of intracranial hypertension management guided by ventricular versus intraparenchymal pressure monitoring: a CENTER-TBI study
title_full Comparative effectiveness of intracranial hypertension management guided by ventricular versus intraparenchymal pressure monitoring: a CENTER-TBI study
title_fullStr Comparative effectiveness of intracranial hypertension management guided by ventricular versus intraparenchymal pressure monitoring: a CENTER-TBI study
title_full_unstemmed Comparative effectiveness of intracranial hypertension management guided by ventricular versus intraparenchymal pressure monitoring: a CENTER-TBI study
title_short Comparative effectiveness of intracranial hypertension management guided by ventricular versus intraparenchymal pressure monitoring: a CENTER-TBI study
title_sort comparative effectiveness of intracranial hypertension management guided by ventricular versus intraparenchymal pressure monitoring: a center-tbi study
topic Original Article - Brain trauma
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9233652/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35648213
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00701-022-05257-z
work_keys_str_mv AT volovicivictor comparativeeffectivenessofintracranialhypertensionmanagementguidedbyventricularversusintraparenchymalpressuremonitoringacentertbistudy
AT pisicadana comparativeeffectivenessofintracranialhypertensionmanagementguidedbyventricularversusintraparenchymalpressuremonitoringacentertbistudy
AT gravesteijnbenjaminy comparativeeffectivenessofintracranialhypertensionmanagementguidedbyventricularversusintraparenchymalpressuremonitoringacentertbistudy
AT dirvenclemensmf comparativeeffectivenessofintracranialhypertensionmanagementguidedbyventricularversusintraparenchymalpressuremonitoringacentertbistudy
AT steyerbergewoutw comparativeeffectivenessofintracranialhypertensionmanagementguidedbyventricularversusintraparenchymalpressuremonitoringacentertbistudy
AT ercoleari comparativeeffectivenessofintracranialhypertensionmanagementguidedbyventricularversusintraparenchymalpressuremonitoringacentertbistudy
AT stocchettinino comparativeeffectivenessofintracranialhypertensionmanagementguidedbyventricularversusintraparenchymalpressuremonitoringacentertbistudy
AT nelsondavid comparativeeffectivenessofintracranialhypertensionmanagementguidedbyventricularversusintraparenchymalpressuremonitoringacentertbistudy
AT menondavidk comparativeeffectivenessofintracranialhypertensionmanagementguidedbyventricularversusintraparenchymalpressuremonitoringacentertbistudy
AT citeriogiuseppe comparativeeffectivenessofintracranialhypertensionmanagementguidedbyventricularversusintraparenchymalpressuremonitoringacentertbistudy
AT vanderjagtmathieu comparativeeffectivenessofintracranialhypertensionmanagementguidedbyventricularversusintraparenchymalpressuremonitoringacentertbistudy
AT maasandrewir comparativeeffectivenessofintracranialhypertensionmanagementguidedbyventricularversusintraparenchymalpressuremonitoringacentertbistudy
AT haitsmaiaink comparativeeffectivenessofintracranialhypertensionmanagementguidedbyventricularversusintraparenchymalpressuremonitoringacentertbistudy
AT lingsmahesterf comparativeeffectivenessofintracranialhypertensionmanagementguidedbyventricularversusintraparenchymalpressuremonitoringacentertbistudy
AT comparativeeffectivenessofintracranialhypertensionmanagementguidedbyventricularversusintraparenchymalpressuremonitoringacentertbistudy