Raised intracranial pressure (ICP) and low cerebral blood flow (CBF) are associated with ischaemia and poor outcome after brain injury. Therefore, many management protocols target these parameters. This overview summarizes the technical aspects of ICP and CBF monitoring, and their role in the clinical management of brain-injured patients. Furthermore, some applications of these methods in current research are highlighted. ICP is typically measured using probes that are inserted into one of the lateral ventricles or the brain parenchyma. Therapeutic measures used to control ICP have relevant side-effects and continuous monitoring is essential to guide such therapies. ICP is also required to calculate cerebral perfusion pressure which is one of the most important therapeutic targets in brain-injured patients. Several bedside CBF monitoring devices are available. However, most do not measure CBF but rather a parameter that is thought to be proportional to CBF. Frequently used methods include transcranial Doppler which measures blood flow velocity and may be helpful for the diagnosis and monitoring of cerebral vasospasm after subarachnoid haemorrhage or jugular bulb oximetry which gives information on adequacy of CBF in relation to the metabolic demand of the brain. However, there is no clear evidence that incorporating data from CBF monitors into our management strategies improves outcome in brain-injured patients.

Monitoring the injured brain: ICP and CBF

Monitoring of intracranial pressure (ICP) has been used for decades in the fields of neurosurgery and neurology. There are multiple techniques: invasive as well as noninvasive. This paper aims to provide an overview of the advantages and disadvantages of the most common and well-known methods as well as assess whether noninvasive techniques (transcranial Doppler, tympanic membrane displacement, optic nerve sheath diameter, CT scan/MRI and fundoscopy) can be used as reliable alternatives to the invasive techniques (ventriculostomy and microtransducers). Ventriculostomy is considered the gold standard in terms of accurate measurement of pressure, although microtransducers generally are just as accurate. Both invasive techniques are associated with a minor risk of complications such as hemorrhage and infection. Furthermore, zero drift is a problem with selected microtransducers. The non-invasive techniques are without the invasive methods' risk of complication, but fail to measure ICP accurately enough to be used as routine alternatives to invasive measurement. We conclude that invasive measurement is currently the only option for accurate measurement of ICP.

/pdf/intracranial-pressure-monitoring-invasive-versus-non-104jskb23h.pdf

Intracranial Pressure Monitoring: Invasive versus Non-Invasive Methods-A Review

Increased intracranial pressure (ICP) is an important cause of secondary brain injury, and ICP monitoring has become an established component of brain monitoring after traumatic brain injury. ICP cannot be reliably estimated from any specific clinical feature or computed tomography finding and must actually be measured. Different methods of monitoring ICP have been described but intraventricular catheters and microtransducer systems are most widely used in clinical practice. ICP is a complex variable that links ICP and cerebral perfusion pressure and provides additional information from identification and analysis of pathologic ICP wave forms. ICP monitoring can also be augmented by measurement of indices describing cerebrovascular pressure reactivity and pressure-volume compensatory reserve. There is considerable variability in the use of ICP monitoring and treatment modalities among head injury centers. However, there is a large body of clinical evidence supporting the use of ICP monitoring to detect intracranial mass lesions early, guide therapeutic interventions, and assess prognosis, and it is recommended by consensus guidelines for head injury management. There remains a need for a prospective, randomized, controlled trial to identify the value of ICP monitoring and management after head injury.

Monitoring intracranial pressure in traumatic brain injury.

DC and MC are partially supported by NIHR Brain Injury Healthcare Technology Co-operative, Cambridge, UK. JD is supported by a Woolf Fisher Scholarship (NZ). PJAH is supported by the National Institute for Health Research Cambridge BRC as a Research Professor of Neurosurgery. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

/pdf/ultrasound-non-invasive-measurement-of-intracranial-pressure-29fyegua3o.pdf

Ultrasound non-invasive measurement of intracranial pressure in neurointensive care: A prospective observational study

Measurement of intracranial pressure (ICP) can be invaluable in the management of critically ill patients. Cerebrospinal fluid is produced by the choroid plexus in the brain ventricles (a set of communicating chambers), after which it circulates through the different ventricles and exits into the subarachnoid space around the brain, where it is reabsorbed into the venous system. If the fluid does not drain out of the brain or get reabsorbed, the ICP increases, which may lead to brain damage or death. ICP elevation accompanied by dilatation of the cerebral ventricles is termed hydrocephalus, whereas ICP elevation accompanied by normal or small ventricles is termed idiopathic intracranial hypertension. Objective We performed a comprehensive literature review on how to measure ICP invasively and noninvasively. Approach This review discusses the advantages and disadvantages of current invasive and noninvasive approaches. Main results Invasive methods remain the most accurate at measuring ICP, but they are prone to a variety of complications including infection, hemorrhage and neurological deficits. Ventricular catheters remain the gold standard but also carry the highest risk of complications, including difficult or incorrect placement. Direct telemetric intraparenchymal ICP monitoring devices are a good alternative. Noninvasive methods for measuring and evaluating ICP have been developed and classified in five broad categories, but have not been reliable enough to use on a routine basis. These methods include the fluid dynamic, ophthalmic, otic, and electrophysiologic methods, as well as magnetic resonance imaging, transcranial Doppler ultrasonography (TCD), cerebral blood flow velocity, near-infrared spectroscopy, transcranial time-of-flight, spontaneous venous pulsations, venous ophthalmodynamometry, optical coherence tomography of retina, optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD) assessment, pupillometry constriction, sensing tympanic membrane displacement, analyzing otoacoustic emissions/acoustic measure, transcranial acoustic signals, visual-evoked potentials, electroencephalography, skull vibrations, brain tissue resonance and the jugular vein. Significance This review provides a current perspective of invasive and noninvasive ICP measurements, along with a sense of their relative strengths, drawbacks and areas for further improvement. At present, none of the noninvasive methods demonstrates sufficient accuracy and ease of use while allowing continuous monitoring in routine clinical use. However, they provide a realizable ICP measurement in specific patients especially when invasive monitoring is contraindicated or unavailable. Among all noninvasive ICP measurement methods, ONSD and TCD are attractive and may be useful in selected settings though they cannot be used as invasive ICP measurement substitutes. For a sufficiently accurate and universal continuous ICP monitoring method/device, future research and developments are needed to integrate further refinements of the existing methods, combine telemetric sensors and/or technologies, and validate large numbers of clinical studies on relevant patient populations.

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1361-6579/aa7256/pdf

Invasive and noninvasive means of measuring intracranial pressure: a review.

A non-invasive method of assessing intracranial pressure (ICP) would be of benefit to patients with abnormal cerebral pathology that could give rise to changes in ICP. In particular, it would assist the regular monitoring of hydrocephalus patients. This study evaluated a technique using tympanic membrane displacement (TMD) measurements, which has been reported to provide a reliable, non-invasive measure of ICP. A group of 135 hydrocephalus patients was studied, as well as 13 patients with benign intracranial hypertension and a control group of 77 volunteers. TMD measurements were carried out using the Marchbanks measurement system analyser and compared between the groups. In 36 patients, invasive measurements of ICP carried out at the same time were compared with the TMD values. A highly significant relationship was found between TMD and ICP but intersubject variability was high and the predictive value of the technique low. Taking the normal range of ICP to be 10–15 mmHg, the predictive limits of the regression are an order of magnitude wider than this and therefore Vm cannot be used as a surrogate for ICP. In conclusion, TMD measurements do not provide a reliable non-invasive measure of ICP in patients with shunted hydrocephalus.

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0967-3334/26/6/017/pdf

Clinical comparison of tympanic membrane displacement with invasive intracranial pressure measurements.

Objective
Tympanic membrane displacement (TMD) measurements may be useful in the management of patients with hydrocephalus if they can be directly associated with measurements of ICP. We have compared TMD measurements using the Marchbanks Measurement System with invasive ICP monitoring.

S. Shimbles

Papers

Clinical comparison of tympanic membrane displacement with invasive intracranial pressure measurements.

Clinical comparison of tympanic membrane displacement with invasive ICP measurements.