• J Javier Provencio, Neeraj Badjatia, and Participants in the International Multi-disciplinary Consensus Conference on Multimodality Monitoring.
• Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine, NC30, 9500 Euclid Ave., Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA, provenj@ccf.org.
• Neurocrit Care. 2014 Dec 1; 21 Suppl 2: S177-86.

AbstractInflammation is an important part of the normal physiologic response to acute brain injury (ABI). How inflammation is manifest determines if it augments or hinders the resolution of ABI. Monitoring body temperature, the cellular arm of the inflammatory cascade, and inflammatory proteins may help guide therapy. This summary will address the utility of inflammation monitoring in brain-injured adults. An electronic literature search was conducted for English language articles describing the testing, utility, and optimal methods to measure inflammation in ABI. Ninety-four articles were included in this review. Current evidence suggests that control of inflammation after ABI may hold promise for advances in good outcomes. However, our understanding of how much inflammation is good and how much is deleterious is not yet clear. Several important concepts emerge form our review. First, while continuous temperature monitoring of core body temperature is recommended, temperature pattern alone is not useful in distinguishing infectious from noninfectious fever. Second, when targeted temperature management is used, shivering should be monitored at least hourly. Finally, white blood cell levels and protein markers of inflammation may have a limited role in distinguishing infectious from noninfectious fever. Our understanding of optimal use of inflammation monitoring after ABI is limited currently but is an area of active investigation.

26 keywords...

hide…