Critical thresholds of long-pressure reactivity index and impact of intracranial pressure monitoring methods in traumatic brain injury

Abstract

Abstract Background Moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) has a global mortality rate of about 30%, resulting in acquired life-long disabilities in many survivors. To potentially improve outcomes in this TBI population, the management of secondary injuries, particularly the failure of cerebrovascular reactivity (assessed via the pressure reactivity index; PRx, a correlation between intracranial pressure (ICP) and mean arterial blood pressure (MAP)), has gained interest in the field. However, derivation of PRx requires high-resolution data and expensive technological solutions, as calculations use a short time-window, which has resulted in it being used in only a handful of centers worldwide. As a solution to this, low resolution (longer time-windows) PRx has been suggested, known as Long-PRx or LPRx. Though LPRx has been proposed little is known about the best methodology to derive this measure, with different thresholds and time-windows proposed. Furthermore, the impact of ICP monitoring on cerebrovascular reactivity measures is poorly understood. Hence, this observational study establishes critical thresholds of LPRx associated with long-term functional outcome, comparing different time-windows for calculating LPRx as well as evaluating LPRx determined through external ventricular drains (EVD) vs intraparenchymal pressure device (IPD) ICP monitoring. Methods The study included a total of n = 435 TBI patients from the Karolinska University Hospital. Patients were dichotomized into alive vs. dead and favorable vs. unfavorable outcomes based on 1-year Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS). Pearson’s chi-square values were computed for incrementally increasing LPRx or ICP thresholds against outcome. The thresholds that generated the greatest chi-squared value for each LPRx or ICP parameter had the highest outcome discriminatory capacity. This methodology was also completed for the segmentation of the population based on EVD, IPD, and time of data recorded in hospital stay. Results LPRx calculated with 10–120-min windows behaved similarly, with maximal chi-square values ranging at around a LPRx of 0.25–0.35, for both survival and favorable outcome. When investigating the temporal relations of LPRx derived thresholds, the first 4 days appeared to be the most associated with outcomes. The segmentation of the data based on intracranial monitoring found limited differences between EVD and IPD, with similar LPRx values around 0.3. Conclusion Our work suggests that the underlying prognostic factors causing impairment in cerebrovascular reactivity can, to some degree, be detected using lower resolution PRx metrics (similar found thresholding values) with LPRx found clinically using as low as 10 min-by-minute samples of MAP and ICP. Furthermore, EVD derived LPRx with intermittent cerebrospinal fluid draining, seems to present similar outcome capacity as IPD. This low-resolution low sample LPRx method appears to be an adequate substitute for the clinical prognostic value of PRx and may be implemented independent of ICP monitoring method when PRx is not feasible, though further research is warranted.