4.3 Review

Hyperoxia: good or bad for the injured brain?

Journal

CURRENT OPINION IN CRITICAL CARE
Volume 14, Issue 2, Pages 167-171

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MCC.0b013e3282f57552

Keywords

cerebral metabolism; head injury; hyperoxia; oxygen

Funding

  1. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE [P01NS035966, P50NS035966] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  2. NINDS NIH HHS [P01 NS035966-09, P01 NS035966, NS035966] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose of review For decades it was assumed that cerebral ischemia was a major cause of secondary brain injury in traumatic brain injury, and management focused on improving cerebral perfusion and blood flow. Following the observation of mitochondrial dysfunction in traumatic brain injury and the widespread use of brain tissue oxygen tension (PbrO2) monitoring, however, recent work has focused on the use of hyperoxia to reduce the impact of traumatic brain injury. Recent findings Previous work on normobaric hyperoxia utilized very indirect measures of cerebral oxygen metabolism (intracranial pressure, brain oxygen tension and microdialysis) as outcome variables. Interpretation of these measures is controversial, making it difficult to determine the impact of hyperoxia. A recent study, however, utilized positron emission tomography to study the impact of hyperoxia on patients with acute severe traumatic brain injury and found no improvement on cerebral metabolic rate for oxygen with this intervention. Summary Despite suggestive data from microdialysis studies, direct measurement of the ability of the brain to utilize oxygen indicates that hyperoxia does not increase oxygen utilization. This, combined with the real risk of oxygen toxicity, suggests that routine clinical use is not appropriate at this time and should await appropriate prospective outcome studies.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available