4.4 Review

Physiological and biochemical principles underlying volume-targeted therapy - The Lund concept

Journal

NEUROCRITICAL CARE
Volume 2, Issue 1, Pages 83-95

Publisher

HUMANA PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1385/NCC:2:1:083

Keywords

blood-brain barrier; brain edema; brain trauma; colloid osmotic pressure; hydrostatic capillary pressure; microdialysis; Starling formula

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The optimal therapy of sustained increase in intracranial pressure (ICP) remains controversial. The volume-targeted therapy (Lund concept) discussed in this article focuses on the physiological volume regulation of the intracranial compartments. The balance between effective transcapillary hydrostatic and osmotic pressures constitutes the driving force for transcapillary fluid exchange. The low permeability for sodium and chloride combined with the high crystalloid osmotic pressure (approximately 5700 mmHg) on both sides of the blood-brain barrier (BBB) counteracts fluid exchange across the intact BBB. Additionally, variations in systemic blood pressure generally are not transmitted to these capillaries because cerebral intracapillary hydrostatic pressure (and blood flow) is physiologically tightly autoregulated. Under pathophysiological conditions, the BBB may be partially disrupted. Transcapillary water exchange is then determined by the differences in hydrostatic and colloid osmotic pressure between the intra- and extracapillary compartments. Pressure autoregulation of cerebral blood flow is likely to be impaired in these conditions. A high cerebral perfusion pressure accordingly increases intracapillary hydrostatic pressure and leads to increased intracerebral water content and an increase in ICP. The volume-targeted Lund concept has been evaluated in experimental and clinical studies to examine the physiological and biochemical (utilizing intracerebral microdialysis) effects, and the clinical experiences have been favorable.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available