• Syeda Tabassum, Alexander Ruesch, Deepshikha Acharya, Jason Yang, Filip A J Relander, Bradley Scammon, Michael S Wolf, Jaskaran Rakkar, ClarkRobert S BRSB2Division of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, Department of Critical Care Medicine, UPMC Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh., Michael M McDowell, and Jana M Kainerstorfer.
• 1Department of Biomedical Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh.
• J. Neurosurg. 2023 Jul 1; 139 (1): 184193184-193.

ObjectiveIntracranial pressure (ICP) is an important therapeutic target in many critical neuropathologies. The current tools for ICP measurements are invasive; hence, these are only selectively applied in critical cases where the benefits surpass the risks. To address the need for low-risk ICP monitoring, the authors developed a noninvasive alternative.MethodsThe authors recently demonstrated noninvasive quantification of ICP in an animal model by using morphological analysis of microvascular cerebral blood flow (CBF) measured with diffuse correlation spectroscopy (DCS). The current prospective observational study expanded on this preclinical study by translating the method to pediatric patients. Here, the CBF features, along with mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) data, were used to build a random decision forest, machine learning model for estimation of ICP; the results of this model were compared with those of invasive monitoring.ResultsFifteen patients (mean age ± SD [range] 9.8 ± 5.1 [0.3-17.5] years; median age [interquartile range] 11 [7.4] years; 10 males and 5 females) who underwent invasive neuromonitoring for any purpose were enrolled. Estimated ICP (ICPest) very closely matched invasive ICP (ICPinv), with a root mean square error (RMSE) of 1.01 mm Hg and 95% limit of agreement of ≤ 1.99 mm Hg for ICPinv 0.01-41.25 mm Hg. When the ICP range (ICPinv 0.01-29.05 mm Hg) was narrowed on the basis of the sample population, both RMSE and limit of agreement improved to 0.81 mm Hg and ≤ 1.6 mm Hg, respectively. In addition, 0.3% of the test samples for ICPinv ≤ 20 mm Hg and 5.4% of the test samples for ICPinv > 20 mm Hg had a limit of agreement > 5 mm Hg, which may be considered the acceptable limit of agreement for clinical validity of ICP sensing. For the narrower case, 0.1% of test samples for ICPinv ≤ 20 mm Hg and 1.1% of the test samples for ICPinv > 20 mm Hg had a limit of agreement > 5 mm Hg. Although the CBF features were crucial, the best prediction accuracy was achieved when these features were combined with MAP and HR data. Lastly, preliminary leave-one-out analysis showed model accuracy with an RMSE of 6 mm Hg and limit of agreement of ≤ 7 mm Hg.ConclusionsThe authors have shown that DCS may enable ICP monitoring with additional clinical validation. The lower risk of such monitoring would allow ICP to be estimated for a wide spectrum of indications, thereby both reducing the use of invasive monitors and increasing the types of patients who may benefit from ICP-directed therapies.

20 keywords...

hide…