Neurocritical care
-
In the management of traumatic brain injury (TBI), intracranial pressure monitoring (ICPm) is crucial for the timely management of severe cases that show rapid neurological deterioration. External ventricular drains (EVDs) and intraparenchymal pressure monitors (IPMs) are the primary methods used in this setting; however, the debate over their comparative efficacy persists, primarily because of reliance on observational study data. This underscores the need for a meta-analysis to guide clinical decision-making. ⋯ However, IPM may offer significant advantages in reducing the duration of ICPm and intensive care unit length of stay. EVD may be preferable for certain mid-term to long-term monitoring. The predominance of observational studies in the current literature highlights the need for further clinical trials to compare these interventions.
-
Cerebral microbleeds (CMBs) have been described in critically ill patients with respiratory failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), or sepsis. This scoping review aimed to systematically summarize existing literature on critical illness-associated CMBs. ⋯ Cerebral microbleeds are commonly reported in patients with critical illness due to respiratory failure, ARDS, or sepsis. CMBs had a predilection for the corpus callosum and juxtacortical area, which may be specific to critical illness-associated CMBs. Functional and cognitive outcomes of these lesions are largely unknown.
-
Editorial Review
Noninvasive Intracranial Pressure Monitoring: Are We There Yet?
There is an urgent unmet need for a reliable noninvasive tool to detect elevations in intracranial pressure (ICP) above guideline-recommended thresholds for treatment. Gold standard invasive ICP monitoring is unavailable in many settings, including resource-limited environments, and in situations such as liver failure in which coagulopathy increases the risk of invasive monitoring. Although a large number of noninvasive techniques have been evaluated, this article reviews the potential clinical role, if any, of the techniques that have undergone the most extensive evaluation and are already in clinical use. ⋯ No current noninvasive technology can replace invasive ICP monitoring. Where ICP monitoring is unavailable, multimodal noninvasive assessment may be useful. Further innovation and research are required to develop a reliable, continuous technique of noninvasive ICP assessment.