Traumatic cervical spinal cord injury: Comparison of two different blood pressure targets on neurological recovery

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundControversy exists whether blood pressure augmentation therapy benefits patients suffering from spinal cord injury (SCI). This retrospective comparative study was designed to assess the impact of two different mean arterial pressure (MAP) targets (85–90 mmHg vs. 65–85 mmHg) on neurological recovery after traumatic cervical SCI.MethodsFifty‐one adult patients with traumatic cervical SCI were retrospectively divided into two groups according to their intensive care unit (ICU) MAP targets: 85–90 mmHg (higher MAP group, n = 32) and 65–85 mmHg (lower MAP group, n = 19). Invasive MAP measurements were stored as 2‐min median values for 3–7 days. The severity of SCI (AIS grade and neurological level) was evaluated upon ICU stay and during rehabilitation. Neurological recovery was correlated with individual mean MAP values and with the proportion of MAP values ≥85 mmHg upon the first 3 days (3d‐MAP%≥85).ResultsThe initial AIS grades were A 29.4%, B 17.6%, C 31.4%, and D 21.6%. AIS grade improved in 24 patients (47.1%). During ICU care, 82.0% and 36.8% of the measured MAP values reached ≥85 mmHg in the higher and the lower MAP groups, respectively (p < .001). The medians of individual mean MAP values were different between the groups (90.2 mmHg vs. 81.4 mmHg, p < .001). Similarly, 3d‐MAP%≥85 was higher in the higher MAP group (85.6% vs. 50.0%, p < .001). However, neurological recovery was not different between the groups, nor did it correlate with individual mean MAP values or 3d‐MAP%≥85.ConclusionThe currently recommended MAP target of 85–90 mmHg was not associated with improved outcomes compared to a lower target in patients with traumatic cervical SCI in this cohort.