The effect of ICP monitoring in severe traumatic brain injury: a propensity score–weighted and adjusted regression approach

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The use of intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring has been postulated to be beneficial in patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), although studies investigating this hypothesis have reported conflicting results. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of inserting an ICP monitor on survival in patients with severe TBI.

METHODS

The Oslo University Hospital trauma registry was searched for the records of all patients admitted between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2013, who fulfilled the Brain Trauma Foundation criteria for intracranial hypertension and who survived at least 24 hours after admission. The impact of ICP monitoring was investigated using both a logistic regression model and a multiple imputed, propensity score–weighted logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

The study involved 1327 patients, in which 757 patients had an ICP monitor implanted. The use of ICP monitors significantly increased in the study period (p < 0.01). The 30-day overall mortality was 24.3% (322 patients), divided into 35.1% (200 patients, 95% confidence interval [CI] 31.3%–39.1%) in the group without an ICP monitor and 16.1% (122 patients, 95% CI 13.6%–18.9%) in the group with an ICP monitor. The impact of ICP monitors on 30-day mortality was found to be beneficial both in the complete case analysis logistic regression model (odds ratio [OR] 0.23, 95% CI 0.16–0.33) and in the adjusted, aggregated, propensity score–weighted imputed data sets (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.15–0.35; both p < 0.001). The sensitivity analysis indicated that the findings are robust to unmeasured confounders.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors found that the use of an ICP monitor is significantly associated with improved survival in patients with severe head injury.

Related collections

Most cited references 21

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

A trial of intracranial-pressure monitoring in traumatic brain injury.

Randall Chesnut, Nancy Temkin, Nancy Carney … (2012)

Intracranial-pressure monitoring is considered the standard of care for severe traumatic brain injury and is used frequently, but the efficacy of treatment based on monitoring in improving the outcome has not been rigorously assessed. We conducted a multicenter, controlled trial in which 324 patients 13 years of age or older who had severe traumatic brain injury and were being treated in intensive care units (ICUs) in Bolivia or Ecuador were randomly assigned to one of two specific protocols: guidelines-based management in which a protocol for monitoring intraparenchymal intracranial pressure was used (pressure-monitoring group) or a protocol in which treatment was based on imaging and clinical examination (imaging-clinical examination group). The primary outcome was a composite of survival time, impaired consciousness, and functional status at 3 months and 6 months and neuropsychological status at 6 months; neuropsychological status was assessed by an examiner who was unaware of protocol assignment. This composite measure was based on performance across 21 measures of functional and cognitive status and calculated as a percentile (with 0 indicating the worst performance, and 100 the best performance). 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 vs. 53 in the imaging-clinical examination group; P=0.49). Six-month mortality was 39% in the pressure-monitoring group and 41% in the imaging-clinical examination group (P=0.60). The median length of stay in the ICU was 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 (e.g., 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 vs. 3.4, P=0.002). The distribution of serious adverse events was similar in the two groups. For patients with severe traumatic brain injury, care focused on maintaining monitored intracranial pressure at 20 mm Hg or less was not shown to be superior to care based on imaging and clinical examination. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01068522.).

0 comments Cited 338 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Propensity score estimation with boosted regression for evaluating causal effects in observational studies.

Daniel McCaffrey, Greg Ridgeway, Andrew R Morral (2004)

Causal effect modeling with naturalistic rather than experimental data is challenging. In observational studies participants in different treatment conditions may also differ on pretreatment characteristics that influence outcomes. Propensity score methods can theoretically eliminate these confounds for all observed covariates, but accurate estimation of propensity scores is impeded by large numbers of covariates, uncertain functional forms for their associations with treatment selection, and other problems. This article demonstrates that boosting, a modern statistical technique, can overcome many of these obstacles. The authors illustrate this approach with a study of adolescent probationers in substance abuse treatment programs. Propensity score weights estimated using boosting eliminate most pretreatment group differences and substantially alter the apparent relative effects of adolescent substance abuse treatment. ((c) 2004 APA, all rights reserved).

0 comments Cited 307 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Multivariable prognostic analysis in traumatic brain injury: results from the IMPACT study.

Gordon D Murray, Isabella Butcher, Gillian S McHugh … (2007)

We studied the prognostic value of a wide range of conventional and novel prognostic factors on admission after traumatic brain injury (TBI) using both univariate and multivariable analysis. The outcome measure was Glasgow Outcome Scale at 6 months after injury. Individual patient data were available on a cohort of 8686 patients drawn from eight randomized controlled trials and three observational studies. The most powerful independent prognostic variables were age, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) motor score, pupil response, and computerized tomography (CT) characteristics, including the Marshall CT classification and traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage. Prothrombin time was also identified as a powerful independent prognostic factor, but it was only available for a limited number of patients coming from three of the relevant studies. Other important prognostic factors included hypotension, hypoxia, the eye and verbal components of the GCS, glucose, platelets, and hemoglobin. These results on prognostic factors will underpin future work on the IMPACT project, which is focused on the development of novel approaches to the design and analysis of clinical trials in TBI. In addition, the results provide pointers to future research, including further analysis of the prognostic value of prothrombin time, and the evaluation of the clinical impact of intervening aggressively to correct abnormalities in hemoglobin, glucose, and coagulation.

0 comments Cited 144 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Title: Journal of Neurosurgery

Publisher: Journal of Neurosurgery Publishing Group (JNSPG)

ISSN (Print): 0022-3085

ISSN (Electronic): 1933-0693

Publication date Created: December 2018

Publication date (Print): December 2018

Pages: 1-9

Affiliations

[1 ]1Departments of Neurosurgery and

[2 ]2The Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo; and

[3 ]3Anesthesiology, and

[4 ]6Oslo University Hospital Trauma Registry, Oslo University Hospital;

[5 ]4Department of Pulmonary Medicine and

[6 ]5HØKH, Research Centre, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway

Article

DOI: 10.3171/2018.7.JNS18270

PubMed ID: 30579278

SO-VID: 25baa725-4a63-4aa0-a4ca-4004aadfa37d

History

Data availability:

Comments

Comment on this article

scite_

Smart Citations

Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting

View Citations

See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.