4.4 Article

Serial Measurement of Static and Dynamic Cerebrovascular Autoregulation After Brain Injury

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGICAL ANESTHESIOLOGY
卷 23, 期 1, 页码 41-44

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/ANA.0b013e3181f35854

关键词

traumatic brain injury; intracranial hemorrhage; dynamic cerebrovascular autoregulation; static cerebrovascular autoregulation; transcranial Doppler sonography

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: In patients with neuronal injury, the knowledge of the status of cerebrovascular autoregulation can help to optimize the management of the cerebral perfusion pressure. This study characterizes dynamic and static cerebrovascular autoregulation during the first 7 days after severe traumatic brain injury or intracranial hemorrhage. Methods: After approval from the IRB, 16 patients were studied. Cerebral blood flow velocity (CBFV) was measured daily for the assessment of dynamic (10 patients) and static (16 patients) cerebrovascular autoregulation in both the middle cerebral arteries using the transcranial Doppler sonography. Dynamic cerebrovascular autoregulation (dAR) was measured using the cuff-deflation method and was expressed by the index of the dAR. The index of the static cerebrovascular autoregulation (sAR) was calculated from changes in the CBFV in relation to drug-induced alterations of the arterial blood pressure. For statistical analyses, t test and mixed effect model were used. Results: Both dAR and sAR after brain injury were impaired in most of the patients. The chronologic sequence of the dAR at the ipsilateral injured hemisphere showed a significant decrease until day 4 followed by an incomplete recovery (P < 0.002). Changes in sAR were similar, however, they did not gain statistical significance. CBFV was lower at day 1-2 after injury in comparison with day 4 to 7 (P < 0.02). Conclusion: Daily measured dAR and sAR were impaired after brain injury with a nadir on day 4 and consecutive incomplete recovery over time.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据