[Study of multimodal monitoring in neurocritical care patients].

OBJECTIVE

To explore the significance of multimodal monitoring in the monitoring and treatment of neurocritical care patients.

METHODS

104 neurocritical care patients admitted to the department of Critical Care Medicine of Fujian Provincial Hospital from March 2019 to January 2020 were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned into two groups, with 52 in each group. In the routine monitoring treatment group, heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate and the changes in consciousness and pupils were monitored after operation. The patients were treated with routine medicine to reduce intracranial pressure (ICP), maintain proper cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP), balance fluid intake and output, and maintain the airway clear. Patients in the multimodal monitoring treatment group were treated with invasive ICP monitoring, ultrasound to assess brain structure, ultrasound to measure optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD), transcranial color doppler (TCCD), internal jugular venous blood oxygen saturation monitoring, near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), non-invasive cerebral blood oxygen saturation monitoring and quantitative electroencephalogram monitoring. According to the monitoring results, the patients were given targeted treatment with the goal of controlling ICP and improving brain metabolism. The length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, the incidences of neurological complications (secondary cerebral infarction, cerebral hemorrhage, high intracranial pressure, etc.), and the incidences of poor prognosis [6 months after the onset of Glasgow outcome score (GOS) 1 to 3] were compared between the two groups. Spearman rank correlation analysis of the correlation between invasive ICP and the ICP value which was calculated by TCCD. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of invasive ICP and pulsatility index of middle cerebral artery (PI) were used to predict poor prognosis.

RESULTS

The length of ICU stay in the multimodal monitoring treatment group was significantly shorter than that of the routine monitoring treatment group (days: 6.27±3.81 vs. 9.61±5.09, P < 0.01), and the incidence of neurological complications was significantly lower than that in the routine monitoring treatment group (9.62% vs. 25.00%, P < 0.05). In the multimodal monitoring treatment group, 37 cases had a good prognosis and 15 cases had a poor prognosis, while the routine monitoring treatment group had a good prognosis in 27 cases and a poor prognosis in 25 cases. The incidence of poor prognosis in the multimodal monitoring treatment group was lower than that of the routine monitoring treatment group (28.85% vs. 48.08%, P < 0.05). In the multimodal monitoring treatment group, the invasive ICP and PI of patients with good prognosis were significantly lower than those of patients with poor prognosis [invasive ICP (mmHg, 1 mmHg = 0.133 kPa): 16 (12, 17) vs. 22 (20, 24), PI: 0.90±0.33 vs. 1.39±0.58, both P < 0.01]. There was no significant difference in resistance index of the middle cerebral artery (RI) between the good prognosis group and the poor prognosis group (0.63±0.12 vs. 0.66±0.15, P > 0.05). There was a positive correlation between the invasive ICP and the ICP value which was calculated by TCCD (r = 0.767, P < 0.001). ROC curve analysis showed that the area under ROC curve (AUC) of invasive ICP for poor prognosis prediction was 0.906, the best cut-off value was ≥ 18 mmHg, the sensitivity was 86.49%, and the specificity was 86.67%. The AUC of PIMCA for poor prognosis prediction was 0.759, the best cut-off value was ≥ 1.12, the sensitivity was 81.08%, and the specificity was 60.00%. The AUC of invasive ICP was greater than PI (Z = 2.279, P = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

Comprehensive analysis of multimodal monitoring indicators for neurocritical care patients to guide clinical treatment can reduce the length of hospital stay, and reduce the risk of neurosurgery complications and disability; invasive ICP can predict poor prognosis of neurocritical care patients.