Kunapaisal Thitikan, Moore Anne, Theard Marie A, King Mary A, Chesnut Randall M, Vavilala Monica S, Lele Abhijit V
Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
Harborview Injury Prevention, and Research Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
Front Pediatr. 2023 Jan 10;10:1072851. doi: 10.3389/fped.2022.1072851. eCollection 2022.
To report our institutional experience with implementing a clinical cerebral autoregulation testing order set with protocol in children hospitalized with traumatic brain injury (TBI).
After IRB approval, we examined clinical use, patient characteristics, feasibility, and safety of cerebral autoregulation testing in children aged <18 years between 2014 and 2021. A clinical order set with a protocol for cerebral autoregulation testing was introduced in 2018.
25 (24 severe TBI and 1 mild TBI) children, median age 13 years [IQR 4.5; 15] and median admission GCS 3[IQR 3; 3.5]) underwent 61 cerebral autoregulation tests during the first 16 days after admission [IQR1.5; 7; range 0-16]. Testing was more common after implementation of the order set ( = 16, 64% after the order set vs. = 9, 36% before the order set) and initiated during the first 2 days. During testing, patients were mechanically ventilated ( = 60, 98.4%), had invasive arterial blood pressure monitoring ( = 60, 98.4%), had intracranial pressure monitoring ( = 56, 90.3%), brain-tissue oxygenation monitoring ( = 56, 90.3%), and external ventricular drain ( = 13, 25.5%). Most patients received sedation and analgesia for intracranial pressure control ( = 52; 83.8%) and vasoactive support ( = 55, 90.2%) during testing. Cerebral autoregulation testing was completed in 82% ( = 50 tests); 11 tests were not completed [high intracranial pressure ( = 5), high blood pressure ( = 2), bradycardia ( = 2), low cerebral perfusion pressure ( = 1), or intolerance to blood pressure cuff inflation ( = 1)]. Impaired cerebral autoregulation on first assessment resulted in repeat testing (80% impaired vs. 23% intact, RR 2.93, 95% CI 1.06:8.08, = 0.03). Seven out of 50 tests (14%) resulted in a change in cerebral hemodynamic targets.
Findings from this series of children with TBI indicate that: (1) Availability of clinical order set with protocol facilitated clinical cerebral autoregulation testing, (2) Clinicians ordered cerebral autoregulation tests in children with severe TBI receiving high therapeutic intensity and repeatedly with impaired status on the first test, (3) Clinical cerebral autoregulation testing is feasible and safe, and (4) Testing results led to change in hemodynamic targets in some patients.
报告我们在为创伤性脑损伤(TBI)住院儿童实施临床脑自动调节测试医嘱集及方案方面的机构经验。
经机构审查委员会(IRB)批准,我们研究了2014年至2021年间18岁以下儿童脑自动调节测试的临床应用、患者特征、可行性和安全性。2018年引入了一套包含脑自动调节测试方案的临床医嘱集。
25名(24名重度TBI和1名轻度TBI)儿童,中位年龄13岁[四分位间距(IQR)4.5;15],入院时格拉斯哥昏迷量表(GCS)中位数为3[IQR 3;3.5],在入院后的前16天内接受了61次脑自动调节测试[IQR 1.5;7;范围0 - 16]。医嘱集实施后测试更为常见(n = 16,医嘱集实施后占64%,而医嘱集实施前n = 9,占36%),且在最初2天内开始。测试期间,患者接受机械通气(n = 60,98.4%)、有创动脉血压监测(n = 60,98.4%)、颅内压监测(n = 56,90.3%)、脑组织氧合监测(n = 56,90.3%)以及外置脑室引流(n = 13,25.5%)。大多数患者在测试期间接受了用于控制颅内压的镇静和镇痛(n = 52;83.8%)以及血管活性支持(n = 55,90.2%)。82%(n = 50次测试)完成了脑自动调节测试;11次测试未完成[颅内压高(n = 5)、血压高(n = 2)、心动过缓(n = 2)、脑灌注压低(n = 1)或对血压袖带充气不耐受(n = 1)]。首次评估时脑自动调节受损导致重复测试(受损者80%,正常者23%,相对危险度2.93,95%置信区间1.06:8.08,P = 0.03)。50次测试中有7次(14%)导致脑血流动力学目标发生改变。
这一系列TBI儿童的研究结果表明:(1)带有方案的临床医嘱集便于临床脑自动调节测试;(2)临床医生对接受高治疗强度且首次测试时状态受损的重度TBI儿童进行脑自动调节测试,且多次测试;(3)临床脑自动调节测试是可行且安全的;(4)测试结果导致部分患者的血流动力学目标发生改变。