4.2 Article

Monitoring of brain tissue oxygenation following severe subarachnoid hemorrhage

期刊

NEUROLOGICAL RESEARCH
卷 25, 期 5, 页码 445-450

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1179/016164103101201823

关键词

cerebral oxygenation; cerebral perfusion pressure; intracranial pressure; subarachnoid hemorrhage; outcome

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The purpose of this prospective observational study was to investigate the relation between the frequency of critical neuromonitoring parameters (brain tissue pO(2), (PtiO2) less than or equal to 10 mmHg, intracranial pressure (ICP) > 20 mmHg, cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) less than or equal to70 mmHg) and outcome after severe aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). In a prospective study on 42 patients monitoring of ICP, CPP, and PtiO2 (in the area at risk for vasospasm) was performed. All patients were primarily classified as Hunt and Hess grade 4 or with secondary deterioration to this grade. Relative proportions of PtiO2 less than or equal to 10 mmHg (n = 42), ICP > 20 mmHg (n = 25) and CPP less than or equal to70 mmHg (n = 23) were derived from multimodal neuromonitoring data sets for different time intervals, i.e. 1. the total monitoring time, 2. the total monitoring time without the last two monitoring days; 3. the second last monitoring day; and 4. the last monitoring day. Patients were divided into nonsurvivors (GOS= 1) and survivors (GOS= 3-5). For the total monitoring time, significant differences in the relative proportion of critical values were found for all neuromonitoring parameters (p < 0.05). The detailed analysis of consecutive time intervals revealed significantly increased proportions of critical values in nonsurvivors for all neuromonitoring parameters during the last day only. Additionally, ICP > 20 mmHg was significantly more frequent during the second last day (p < 0.01). For other time periods no differences were observed. We conclude, that critical neuromonitoring values are not early predictors of nonsurvival in patients suffering from severe SAH.

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

4.2
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