Department of Nursing Research, The MetroHealth System, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Neurocritical Care, Mission Hospital, Mission Viejo, CA, USA.
Neurocrit Care. 2018 Apr;28(2):221-228. doi: 10.1007/s12028-017-0467-7.
Cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) is a key parameter in management of brain injury with suspected impaired cerebral autoregulation. CPP is calculated by subtracting intracranial pressure (ICP) from mean arterial pressure (MAP). Despite consensus on importance of CPP monitoring, substantial variations exist on anatomical reference points used to measure arterial MAP when calculating CPP. This study aimed to identify differences in CPP values based on measurement location when using phlebostatic axis (PA) or tragus (Tg) as anatomical reference points. The secondary study aim was to determine impact of differences on patient outcomes at discharge.
This was a prospective, repeated measures, multi-site national trial. Adult ICU patients with neurological injury necessitating ICP and CPP monitoring were consecutively enrolled from seven sites. Daily MAP/ICP/CPP values were gathered with the arterial transducer at the PA, followed by the Tg as anatomical reference points.
A total of 136 subjects were enrolled, resulting in 324 paired observations. There were significant differences for CPP when comparing values obtained at PA and Tg reference points (p < 0.000). Differences remained significant in repeated measures model when controlling for clinical factors (mean CPP-PA = 80.77, mean CPP-Tg = 70.61, p < 0.000). When categorizing CPP as binary endpoint, 18.8% of values were identified as adequate with PA values, yet inadequate with CPP values measured at the Tg.
Findings identify numerical differences for CPP based on anatomical reference location and highlight importance of a standard reference point for both clinical practice and future trials to limit practice variations and heterogeneity of findings.
脑灌注压(CPP)是疑似脑自动调节受损的脑损伤管理的关键参数。CPP 通过从平均动脉压(MAP)中减去颅内压(ICP)来计算。尽管对 CPP 监测的重要性达成共识,但在计算 CPP 时,用于测量动脉 MAP 的解剖参考点存在很大差异。本研究旨在确定使用静脉静止轴(PA)或耳屏(Tg)作为解剖参考点时,基于测量位置 CPP 值的差异。次要研究目的是确定差异对出院时患者结局的影响。
这是一项前瞻性、重复测量、多中心的全国性试验。从七个地点连续纳入需要 ICP 和 CPP 监测的神经损伤成人 ICU 患者。每天使用动脉换能器在 PA 后收集 MAP/ICP/CPP 值,然后使用 Tg 作为解剖参考点。
共纳入 136 例患者,共获得 324 对观察值。与 PA 和 Tg 参考点相比,CPP 值存在显著差异(p<0.000)。在控制临床因素的重复测量模型中,差异仍然显著(平均 CPP-PA=80.77,平均 CPP-Tg=70.61,p<0.000)。当将 CPP 分类为二分类终点时,18.8%的 PA 值确定为足够,但 Tg 测量的 CPP 值不足。
研究结果确定了基于解剖参考位置的 CPP 的数值差异,并强调了为临床实践和未来试验确定标准参考点的重要性,以限制实践差异和研究结果的异质性。