| 1. |
- Chesnut, Randall, et al.
(författare)
-
A management algorithm for adult patients with both brain oxygen and intracranial pressure monitoring : the Seattle International Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Consensus Conference (SIBICC)
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Intensive Care Medicine. - : Springer. - 0342-4642 .- 1432-1238. ; 46:5, s. 919-929
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Current guidelines for the treatment of adult severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) consist of high-quality evidence reports, but they are no longer accompanied by management protocols, as these require expert opinion to bridge the gap between published evidence and patient care. We aimed to establish a modern sTBI protocol for adult patients with both intracranial pressure (ICP) and brain oxygen monitors in place.Methods: Our consensus working group consisted of 42 experienced and actively practicing sTBI opinion leaders from six continents. Having previously established a protocol for the treatment of patients with ICP monitoring alone, we addressed patients who have a brain oxygen monitor in addition to an ICP monitor. The management protocols were developed through a Delphi-method-based consensus approach and were finalized at an in-person meeting.Results: We established three distinct treatment protocols, each with three tiers whereby higher tiers involve therapies with higher risk. One protocol addresses the management of ICP elevation when brain oxygenation is normal. A second addresses management of brain hypoxia with normal ICP. The third protocol addresses the situation when both intracranial hypertension and brain hypoxia are present. The panel considered issues pertaining to blood transfusion and ventilator management when designing the different algorithms.Conclusions: These protocols are intended to assist clinicians in the management of patients with both ICP and brain oxygen monitors but they do not reflect either a standard-of-care or a substitute for thoughtful individualized management. These protocols should be used in conjunction with recommendations for basic care, management of critical neuroworsening and weaning treatment recently published in conjunction with the Seattle International Brain Injury Consensus Conference.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Decraene, Brecht, et al.
(författare)
-
Decompressive craniectomy as a second/third-tier intervention in traumatic brain injury : A multicenter observational study
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Injury. - : Elsevier. - 0020-1383 .- 1879-0267. ; 54:9
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: RESCUEicp studied decompressive craniectomy (DC) applied as third-tier option in severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients in a randomized controlled setting and demonstrated a decrease in mortality with similar rates of favorable outcome in the DC group compared to the medical management group. In many centers, DC is being used in combination with other second/third-tier therapies. The aim of the present study is to investigate outcomes from DC in a prospective non-RCT context.Methods: This is a prospective observational study of 2 patient cohorts: one from the University Hospitals Leuven (2008-2016) and one from the Brain-IT study, a European multicenter database (2003-2005). In thirty-seven patients with refractory elevated intracranial pressure who underwent DC as a second/third-tier intervention, patient, injury and management variables including physiological monitoring data and administration of thio-pental were analysed, as we l l as Extended Glasgow Outcome score (GOSE) at 6 months.Results: In the current cohorts, patients were older than in the surgical RESCUEicp cohort (mean 39.6 vs. 32.3; p < 0.001), had higher Glasgow Motor Score on admission (GMS < 3 in 24.3% vs. 53.0%; p = 0.003) and 37.8% received thiopental (vs. 9.4%; p < 0.001). Other variables were not significantly different. GOSE distribution was: death 24.3%; vegetative 2.7%; lower severe disability 10.8%; upper severe disability 13.5%; lower moderate disability 5.4%; upper moderate disability 2.7%, lower good recovery 35.1%; and upper good recover y 5.4%. The outcome was unfavorable in 51.4% and favorable in 48.6%, as opposed to 72.6% and 27.4% respectively in RESCUEicp (p = 0.02).Conclusion: Outcomes in DC patients from two prospective cohorts reflecting everyday practice were better than in RESCUEicp surgical patients. Mortality was similar, but fewer patients remained vegetative or severely disabled and more patients had a good recovery. Although patients were older and injury severity was lower, a potential partial explanation may be in the pragmatic use of DC in combination with other second/third-tier therapies in real-life cohorts. The findings underscore that DC maintains an important role in managing se-vere TBI.
|
|
| 4. |
- Picetti, Edoardo, et al.
(författare)
-
Early management of isolated severe traumatic brain injury patients in a hospital without neurosurgical capabilities : a consensus and clinical recommendations of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES)
- 2023
-
Ingår i: World Journal of Emergency Surgery. - : BioMed Central (BMC). - 1749-7922. ; 18:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Severe traumatic brain-injured (TBI) patients should be primarily admitted to a hub trauma center (hospital with neurosurgical capabilities) to allow immediate delivery of appropriate care in a specialized environment. Sometimes, severe TBI patients are admitted to a spoke hospital (hospital without neurosurgical capabilities), and scarce data are available regarding the optimal management of severe isolated TBI patients who do not have immediate access to neurosurgical care.METHODS: A multidisciplinary consensus panel composed of 41 physicians selected for their established clinical and scientific expertise in the acute management of TBI patients with different specializations (anesthesia/intensive care, neurocritical care, acute care surgery, neurosurgery and neuroradiology) was established. The consensus was endorsed by the World Society of Emergency Surgery, and a modified Delphi approach was adopted.RESULTS: A total of 28 statements were proposed and discussed. Consensus was reached on 22 strong recommendations and 3 weak recommendations. In three cases, where consensus was not reached, no recommendation was provided.CONCLUSIONS: This consensus provides practical recommendations to support clinician's decision making in the management of isolated severe TBI patients in centers without neurosurgical capabilities and during transfer to a hub center.
|
|
| 5. |
- Sarigul, Buse, et al.
(författare)
-
Prognostication and Goals of Care Decisions in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury : A Survey of The Seattle International Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Consensus Conference Working Group
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Journal of Neurotrauma. - : Mary Ann Liebert. - 0897-7151 .- 1557-9042. ; 40:15-16, s. 1707-1717
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Best practice guidelines have advanced severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) care; however, there is little that currently informs goals of care decisions and processes despite their importance and frequency. Panelists from the Seattle International severe traumatic Brain Injury Consensus Conference (SIBICC) participated in a survey consisting of 24 questions. Questions queried use of prognostic calculators, variability in and responsibility for goals of care decisions, and acceptability of neurological outcomes, as well as putative means of improving decisions that might limit care. A total of 97.6% of the 42 SIBICC panelists completed the survey. Responses to most questions were highly variable. Overall, panelists reported infrequent use of prognostic calculators, and observed variability in patient prognostication and goals of care decisions. They felt that it would be beneficial for physicians to improve consensus on what constitutes an acceptable neurological outcome as well as what chance of achieving that outcome is acceptable. Panelists felt that the public should help to define what constitutes a good outcome and expressed some support for a "nihilism guard." More than 50% of panelists felt that if it was certain to be permanent, a vegetative state or lower severe disability would justify a withdrawal of care decision, whereas 15% felt that upper severe disability justified such a decision. Whether conceptualizing an ideal or existing prognostic calculator to predict death or an unacceptable outcome, on average a 64-69% chance of a poor outcome was felt to justify treatment withdrawal. These results demonstrate important variability in goals of care decision making and a desire to reduce this variability. Our panel of recognized TBI experts opined on the neurological outcomes and chances of those outcomes that might prompt consideration of care withdrawal; however, imprecision of prognostication and existing prognostication tools is a significant impediment to standardizing the approach to care-limiting decisions.
|
|
