1Department of Neurosurgery, Klinikum Stuttgart; and.
2Department of Neurosurgery, University of Erlangen, Germany.
J Neurosurg. 2018 Jun;128(6):1653-1660. doi: 10.3171/2016.11.JNS152268. Epub 2017 Aug 8.
OBJECTIVE There is no established method of noninvasive intracranial pressure (NI-ICP) monitoring that can serve as an alternative to the gold standards of invasive monitoring with external ventricular drainage or intraparenchymal monitoring. In this study a new method of NI-ICP monitoring performed using algorithms to determine ICP based on acoustic properties of the brain was applied in patients undergoing invasive ICP (I-ICP) monitoring, and the results were analyzed. METHODS In patients with traumatic brain injury and subarachnoid hemorrhage who were undergoing treatment in a neurocritical intensive care unit, the authors recorded ICP using the gold standard method of invasive external ventricular drainage or intraparenchymal monitoring. In addition, the authors simultaneously measured the ICP noninvasively with a device (the HS-1000) that uses advanced signal analysis algorithms for acoustic signals propagating through the cranium. To assess the accuracy of the NI-ICP method, data obtained using both I-ICP and NI-ICP monitoring methods were analyzed with MATLAB to determine the statistical significance of the differences between the ICP measurements obtained using NI-ICP and I-ICP monitoring. RESULTS Data were collected in 14 patients, yielding 2543 data points of continuous parallel ICP values in recordings obtained from I-ICP and NI-ICP. Each of the 2 methods yielded the same number of data points. For measurements at the ≥ 17-mm Hg cutoff, which was arbitrarily chosen for this preliminary analysis, the sensitivity and specificity for the NI-ICP monitoring were found to be 0.7541 and 0.8887, respectively. Linear regression analysis indicated that there was a strong positive relationship between the measurements. Differential pressure between NI-ICP and I-ICP was within ± 3 mm Hg in 63% of data-paired readings and within ± 5 mm Hg in 85% of data-paired readings. The receiver operating characteristic-area under the curve analysis revealed that the area under the curve was 0.895, corresponding to the overall performance of NI-ICP monitoring in comparison with I-ICP monitoring. CONCLUSIONS This study provides the first clinical data on the accuracy of the HS-1000 NI-ICP monitor, which uses advanced signal analysis algorithms to evaluate properties of acoustic signals traveling through the brain in patients undergoing I-ICP monitoring. The findings of this study highlight the capability of this NI-ICP device to accurately measure ICP noninvasively. Further studies should focus on clinical validation for elevated ICP values.
目前尚无替代有创脑室内引流或脑实质内监测的金标准的无创颅内压(NI-ICP)监测方法。本研究应用一种新的基于脑声学特性的算法来确定 ICP 的 NI-ICP 监测方法,对接受有创 ICP(I-ICP)监测的患者进行了监测,并对结果进行了分析。
在神经重症监护病房接受治疗的创伤性脑损伤和蛛网膜下腔出血患者中,作者使用有创的脑室外引流或脑实质内监测的金标准方法记录 ICP。此外,作者还使用一种设备(HS-1000)同时无创地测量 ICP,该设备使用先进的信号分析算法对穿过颅骨传播的声信号进行分析。为了评估 NI-ICP 方法的准确性,使用 MATLAB 分析了使用 I-ICP 和 NI-ICP 监测方法获得的数据,以确定使用 NI-ICP 和 I-ICP 监测获得的 ICP 测量值之间的差异的统计学意义。
共收集了 14 例患者的数据,在 I-ICP 和 NI-ICP 记录中获得了 2543 个连续的平行 ICP 值数据点。两种方法都得到了相同数量的数据点。对于该初步分析中任意选择的≥17mmHg 的截止值测量,NI-ICP 监测的灵敏度和特异性分别为 0.7541 和 0.8887。线性回归分析表明,两种方法之间存在很强的正相关关系。NI-ICP 和 I-ICP 之间的压差在 63%的数据配对读数中在±3mmHg 以内,在 85%的数据配对读数中在±5mmHg 以内。受试者工作特征曲线下面积分析显示,曲线下面积为 0.895,这对应于与 I-ICP 监测相比,NI-ICP 监测的整体性能。
本研究提供了 HS-1000 NI-ICP 监测器准确性的首批临床数据,该监测器使用先进的信号分析算法评估接受 I-ICP 监测的患者中穿过大脑的声信号的特性。本研究的结果强调了这种 NI-ICP 设备无创准确测量 ICP 的能力。进一步的研究应侧重于对升高的 ICP 值进行临床验证。