• Stefan Wolf, P Horn, C Frenzel, L Schürer, P Vajkoczy, and J Dengler.
• Department of Neurosurgery, Charité University, Berlin, Germany. stefan.wolf@charite.de
• Acta Neurochir. Suppl. 2012 Jan 1;114:161-4.

IntroductionContinuous bedside brain tissue oxygenation (p(br)O(2)) monitoring using the Licox system is an established method for detecting secondary ischemia in comatose patients with acute brain injury. The purpose of the current study was to compare the newly introduced Raumedic p(br)O(2) probe with the established standard.MethodsEighteen patients with acute traumatic brain injury or aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage had p(br)O(2) probes of both types implanted side by side in the same vascular territory at risk of ischemia. Data were analyzed by the Bland-Altman method as well as random effect regression models to correct for multiple measurements per individual.ResultsBoth types of probes were able to display spontaneous fluctuations of p(br)O(2) as well as reactions to therapy. Mean measurement difference between the Licox and Raumedic probes was -2.3 mmHg, with corresponding 95% limits of agreement of -32.3 to 27.5 mmHg. Regarding an ischemia threshold of 15 mmHg, both probes were in agreement in 78% and showed disparate results in 22%.ConclusionsOur data suggest that the p(br)O(2) measurements of the two systems cannot be interchanged. Although we were unable to determine which system delivers more valid data, we do think that more rigorous testing is necessary before implementing the new probe in clinical routine.

19 keywords...

hide…