Background: We validated a new noninvasive tool (B4C) to assess intracranial pressure waveform (ICPW) morphology in a set of neurocritical patients, correlating the data with ICPW obtained from invasive catheter monitoring. Materials and Methods: Patients undergoing invasive intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring were consecutively evaluated using the B4C sensor. Ultrasound-guided manual internal jugular vein (IJV) compression was performed to elevate ICP from the baseline. ICP values, amplitudes, and time intervals (P2/P1 ratio and time-to-peak [TTP]) between the ICP and B4C waveform peaks were analyzed. Results: Among 41 patients, the main causes for ICP monitoring included traumatic brain injury, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and stroke. Bland–Altman’s plot indicated agreement between the ICPW parameters obtained using both techniques. The strongest Pearson’s correlation for P2/P1 and TTP was observed among patients with no cranial damage (r = 0.72 and 0.85, respectively) to the detriment of those who have undergone craniotomies or craniectomies. P2/P1 values of 1 were equivalent between the two techniques (area under the receiver operator curve [AUROC], 0.9) whereas B4C cut-off 1.2 was predictive of intracranial hypertension (AUROC 0.9, p < 000.1 for ICP > 20 mmHg). Conclusion: B4C provided biometric amplitude ratios correlated with ICPW variation morphology and is useful for noninvasive critical care monitoring.

No abstract

OBJECTIVEThe present study was designed to answer several concerns disclosed by systematic reviews indicating no evidence to support the use of computed tomography angiography (CTA) in the diagnosis of brain death (BD). Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of CTA for the diagnosis of BD and to define the optimal tomographic criteria of intracranial circulatory arrest.METHODSA unicenter, prospective, observational case-control study was undertaken. Comatose patients (Glasgow Coma Scale score ≤ 5), even those presenting with the first signs of BD, were included. CTA scanning of arterial and venous vasculature and transcranial Doppler (TCD) were performed. A neurological determination of BD and consequently determination of case (BD group) or control (no-BD group) was conducted. All personnel involved with assessing patients were blinded to further tests results. Accuracy of BD diagnosis determined by using CTA was calculated based on the criteria of bilateral absence of visualization of the internal cerebral veins and the distal middle cerebral arteries, the 4-point score (4PS), and an exclusive criterion of absence of deep brain venous drainage as indicated by the absence of deep venous opacification on CTA, the venous score (VS), which considers only the internal cerebral veins bilaterally.RESULTSA total of 106 patients were enrolled in this study; 52 patients did not have BD, and none of these patients had circulatory arrest observed by CTA or TCD (100% specificity). Of the 54 patients with a clinical diagnosis of BD, 33 met the 4PS (61.1% sensitivity), whereas 47 met the VS (87% sensitivity). The accuracy of CTA was time related, with greater accuracy when scanning was performed less than 12 hours prior to the neurological assessment, reaching 95.5% sensitivity with the VS.CONCLUSIONSCTA can reliably support a diagnosis of BD. The criterion of the absence of deep venous opacification, which can be assessed by use of the VS criteria investigated in this study, can confirm the occurrence of cerebral circulatory arrest.Clinical trial registration no.: 12500913400000068 (clinicaltrials.gov)

Background: Intracranial compliance (ICC) has been studied to complement the interpretation of intracranial pressure (ICP) in neurocritical care and help predict brain function deterioration. It has been reported that ICC is related to maintaining ICP stability despite changes in intracranial volume. However, this has not been properly translated to clinical practice. Therefore, the main objective of this scoping review was to map the key concepts of ICC in the literature. This review also aimed to characterize the relationship between ICC and ICP and systematically describe the outcomes used to assess ICC using both invasive and non-invasive measurement methods.Methods: This review included the following: (1) population: animal and humans, (2) concept of compliance or its inverse “elastance,” and (3) context: neurocritical care. Therefore, literature searches without a time frame were conducted on several databases using a combination of keywords and descriptors.Results and Discussion: 43,339 articles were identified, and 297 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria after the selection process. One hundred and five studies defined ICC. The concept was organized into three main components: physiological definition, clinical interpretation, and localization of the phenomena. Most of the studies reported the concept of compliance related to variations in volume and pressure or its inverse (elastance), primarily in the intracranial compartment. In addition, terms like “accommodation,” “compensation,” “reserve capacity,” and “buffering ability” were used to describe the clinical interpretation. The second part of this review describes the techniques (invasive and non-invasive) and outcomes used to measure ICC. A total of 297 studies were included. The most common method used was invasive, representing 57–88% of the studies. The most commonly assessed variables were related to ICP, especially the absolute values or pulse amplitude. ICP waveforms should be better explored, along with the potential of non-invasive methods once the different aspects of ICC can be measured.Conclusion: ICC monitoring could be considered a complementary resource for ICP monitoring and clinical examination. The combination and validation of invasive/non-invasive or non-invasive measurement methods are required.

No abstract

Analysis of intracranial pressure waveforms (ICPW) provides information on intracranial compliance. We aimed to assess the correlation between noninvasive ICPW (NICPW) and invasively measured intracranial pressure (ICP) and to assess the NICPW prognostic value in this population. In this cohort, acute brain-injured (ABI) patients were included within 5 days from admission in six Intensive Care Units. Mean ICP (mICP) values and the P2/P1 ratio derived from NICPW were analyzed and correlated with outcome, which was defined as: (a) early death (ED); survivors on spontaneous breathing (SB) or survivors on mechanical ventilation (MV) at 7 days from inclusion. Intracranial hypertension (IHT) was defined by ICP > 20 mmHg. A total of 72 patients were included (mean age 39, 68% TBI). mICP and P2/P1 values were significantly correlated (r = 0.49, p < 0.001). P2/P1 ratio was significantly higher in patients with IHT and had an area under the receiving operator curve (AUROC) to predict IHT of 0.88 (95% CI 0.78–0.98). mICP and P2/P1 ratio was also significantly higher for ED group (n = 10) than the other groups. The AUROC of P2/P1 to predict ED was 0.71 [95% CI 0.53–0.87], and the threshold P2/P1 > 1.2 showed a sensitivity of 60% [95% CI 31–83%] and a specificity of 69% [95% CI 57–79%]. Similar results were observed when decompressive craniectomy patients were excluded. In this study, P2/P1 derived from noninvasive ICPW assessment was well correlated with IHT. This information seems to be as associated with ABI patients outcomes as ICP.Trial registration: NCT03144219, Registered 01 May 2017 Retrospectively registered, https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03144219.

Introduction: One of the possible mechanisms by which the new coronavirus (SARS-Cov2) could induce brain damage is the impairment of cerebrovascular hemodynamics (CVH) and intracranial compliance (ICC), due to the elevation of intracranial pressure (ICP). The main objective of this study was to assess the presence of CVH and ICC alterations in patients with COVID-19 and evaluate their association with short-term clinical outcome. Methods: 50 consecutive critically ill COVID-19 patients were studied with transcranial Doppler (TCD) and a non-invasive monitoring of ICC. Subjects were included on ICU admission; CVH was evaluated using mean flow velocities in the middle cerebral arteries (mCBFV), pulsatility index (PI) and estimated cerebral perfusion pressure (eCPP), while ICC using the P2/P1 ratio of estimated ICP curve (B4C device). The primary composite outcome was unsuccessful weaning from respiratory support or death at day 7.Results: On the first assessment (n= 50), only P2/P1 (1.20 [1.00-1.28] vs. 1.00 [0.88-1.16]; p=0.03) and eICP (14 [11-25] vs. 11 [7-15] mmHg; p=0.01) were significantly higher among patients with UO than others. Patients with UO had a significantly higher CVH/ICC score (9 [8-12] vs. 6 [5-7]; p<0.001) than those with favorable outcome; the area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) for CVH/ICC score to predict UO was 0.86 (95% CIs 0.75-0.97); a score > 8.5 had 63 (46-77)% sensitivity and 87 (62-97)% specificity to predict UO. For those patients undergoing a second assessment (n=29) after a median of 11 (5-31) days, all measured variables were similar between the two time-points. No differences in the measured variables between ICU non-survivors (n=30) and survivors were observed.Conclusions: ICCI and CVH disturbances are often present in COVID-19 severe illness and could accurately predict early poor outcome.

Introduction: One of the possible mechanisms by which the new coronavirus (SARS-Cov2) could induce brain damage is the impairment of cerebrovascular hemodynamics (CVH) and intracranial compliance (ICC) due to the elevation of intracranial pressure (ICP). The main objective of this study was to assess the presence of CVH and ICC alterations in patients with COVID-19 and evaluate their association with short-term clinical outcomes. Methods: Fifty consecutive critically ill COVID-19 patients were studied with transcranial Doppler (TCD) and non-invasive monitoring of ICC. Subjects were included upon ICU admission; CVH was evaluated using mean flow velocities in the middle cerebral arteries (mCBFV), pulsatility index (PI), and estimated cerebral perfusion pressure (eCPP), while ICC was assessed by using the P2/P1 ratio of the non-invasive ICP curve. A CVH/ICC score was computed using all these variables. The primary composite outcome was unsuccessful in weaning from respiratory support or death on day 7 (defined as UO). Results: At the first assessment (n = 50), only the P2/P1 ratio (median 1.20 [IQRs 1.00–1.28] vs. 1.00 [0.88–1.16]; p = 0.03) and eICP (14 [11–25] vs. 11 [7–15] mmHg; p = 0.01) were significantly higher among patients with an unfavorable outcome (UO) than others. Patients with UO had a significantly higher CVH/ICC score (9 [8–12] vs. 6 [5–7]; p < 0.001) than those with a favorable outcome; the area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) for CVH/ICC score to predict UO was 0.86 (95% CIs 0.75–0.97); a score > 8.5 had 63 (46–77)% sensitivity and 87 (62–97)% specificity to predict UO. For those patients undergoing a second assessment (n = 29), after a median of 11 (5–31) days, all measured variables were similar between the two time-points. No differences in the measured variables between ICU non-survivors (n = 30) and survivors were observed. Conclusions: ICC impairment and CVH disturbances are often present in COVID-19 severe illness and could accurately predict an early poor outcome.