Department of Neurosurgery, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Department of Neurosurgery, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
World Neurosurg. 2020 Jan;133:e105-e114. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.08.166. Epub 2019 Aug 31.
For patients with TBI, traditional methods such as clinical examination and imaging data are the primary references used for deciding whether to operate or not. Intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring based on lateral ventricles or parenchymal pressure is a more direct reflection of ICP. However, the research on whether the outcome results of ICP monitoring are better than results based on clinical signs and imaging is sparse. Therefore, we compared treatment results for patients with TBI based on ICP monitoring and traditional methods.
This retrospective study included patients with TBI admitted to our collaborative hospitals between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2013. All patients enrolled were divided into a traditional methods group and ICP monitoring group. Follow-up treatment was determined by ICP monitoring value or traditional methods in the 2 groups. Propensity matching scores were used to ensure that baseline characteristics of patients in the 2 groups were consistent.
A significant association was found between the initial ICP value and neurologic deterioration (odds ratio 1.24; P < 0.001), and nonlinear correlation achieved the best fit (R = 0.547). Both 6-month good recovery rate and favorable outcome rate were higher in the ICP monitoring group than the traditional methods group by propensity score analysis (P < 0.05).
For patients with TBI with cerebral contusion volume >20 mL, both 6-month good recovery rate and favorable outcome rate were significantly higher in the ICP monitoring group than the traditional methods group.
对于 TBI 患者,传统的方法如临床检查和影像学数据是决定是否手术的主要参考。基于侧脑室或实质压力的颅内压(ICP)监测是 ICP 的更直接反映。然而,关于 ICP 监测的结果是否比基于临床症状和影像学的结果更好的研究很少。因此,我们比较了基于 ICP 监测和传统方法治疗 TBI 患者的结果。
这项回顾性研究包括 2012 年 1 月 1 日至 2013 年 12 月 31 日期间在我们合作医院就诊的 TBI 患者。所有纳入的患者均分为传统方法组和 ICP 监测组。两组的随访治疗均由 ICP 监测值或传统方法决定。采用倾向评分匹配来确保两组患者的基线特征一致。
初始 ICP 值与神经恶化之间存在显著关联(优势比 1.24;P<0.001),非线性相关性达到最佳拟合(R=0.547)。通过倾向评分分析,ICP 监测组的 6 个月良好恢复率和良好结局率均高于传统方法组(P<0.05)。
对于脑挫裂伤体积>20mL 的 TBI 患者,ICP 监测组的 6 个月良好恢复率和良好结局率均明显高于传统方法组。