Cytokine Hemoadsorption: Hype or Hope ?

 

Cytokine Hemoadsorption: Hype or Hope in Septic Shock?

A Critical Review of Current Evidence and Clinical Applications

Dr Neeraj Manikath , claude.ai

Abstract

Background: Cytokine hemoadsorption has emerged as an adjunctive therapy for septic shock, aiming to modulate the dysregulated immune response through extracorporeal blood purification. Despite theoretical appeal and widespread clinical adoption, the evidence base remains contentious.

Methods: Comprehensive review of randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and meta-analyses examining cytokine hemoadsorption devices including CytoSorb, oXiris, and polymyxin-B filters in septic shock.

Results: Current evidence demonstrates mixed outcomes with significant methodological limitations across studies. While some trials suggest potential benefits in specific subgroups, large-scale randomized trials have failed to demonstrate clear mortality benefits.

Conclusions: Cytokine hemoadsorption remains investigational with limited high-quality evidence supporting routine use. Careful patient selection and timing may be crucial for future therapeutic success.

Keywords: septic shock, cytokine storm, hemoadsorption, CytoSorb, oXiris, extracorporeal therapy

---

Introduction

Septic shock remains a leading cause of mortality in intensive care units worldwide, with case fatality rates exceeding 40% despite advances in antimicrobial therapy and supportive care¹. The pathophysiology involves a complex dysregulated immune response characterized by excessive cytokine release, endothelial dysfunction, and distributive shock². This understanding has led to the development of extracorporeal cytokine removal technologies as adjunctive therapies.

The concept of "cytokine storm" has gained prominence, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, rekindling interest in blood purification techniques³. However, the translation from theoretical benefit to clinical efficacy has proven challenging, with conflicting trial results and ongoing debate about patient selection, timing, and device selection.

Pathophysiological Rationale

The Cytokine Storm Paradigm

Sepsis involves a biphasic immune response: initial hyperinflammation followed by immunosuppression⁴. Pro-inflammatory mediators including TNF-α, IL-1β, IL-6, and IL-8 contribute to vasodilation, increased vascular permeability, and organ dysfunction⁵. Simultaneously, anti-inflammatory mediators like IL-10 can lead to immunoparalysis.

Pearl: The "Goldilocks principle" applies to sepsis - neither too much nor too little inflammation is ideal. Timing of intervention may be more critical than the intervention itself.

Theoretical Benefits of Cytokine Removal

1. Immunomodulation: Restoration of immune balance
2. Hemodynamic improvement: Reduced vasodilation and capillary leak
3. Organ protection: Decreased inflammatory organ damage
4. Improved antimicrobial efficacy: Enhanced immune function

Oyster: While cytokine levels correlate with severity, they may be markers rather than mediators of poor outcomes.

Technologies and Mechanisms

CytoSorb (CytoSorbents Corporation)

Mechanism: Biocompatible polymer beads with broad-spectrum adsorption capacity

• Pore size: 300-800 Daltons
• Target molecules: Cytokines, chemokines, complement factors, myoglobin
• Flow rates: 200-700 mL/min
• Treatment duration: 24 hours per cartridge

Technical Hack: Optimize blood flow rates to 250-300 mL/min for maximum clearance without excessive hemolysis.

oXiris (Baxter International)

Mechanism: High-permeability membrane with surface treatment

• AN69ST membrane: Heparin-grafted polyacrylonitrile
• Dual function: Conventional CRRT + cytokine adsorption
• Endotoxin binding: Surface-bound polyethyleneimine
• Cytokine clearance: Convective and adsorptive

Pearl: oXiris can be used as standard CRRT replacement, making it cost-neutral in patients already requiring renal replacement therapy.

Polymyxin-B Hemoperfusion (Toraymyxin)

Mechanism: Direct hemoperfusion through polymyxin-B immobilized fibers

• Primary target: Endotoxin (lipopolysaccharide)
• Secondary effects: Cytokine modulation
• Treatment protocol: 2 hours daily for 2 days
• Flow rate: 80-120 mL/min

Technical consideration: Requires dedicated vascular access and cannot be combined with CRRT.

Clinical Evidence: Major Trials and Their Controversies

The CytoSorb Experience

CYCOV Trial (2023)⁶

• Design: Multicenter RCT in COVID-19 ARDS
• Population: 190 patients with severe COVID-19
• Primary endpoint: 60-day mortality
• Results: No significant difference (32.3% vs 37.4%, p=0.53)
• Secondary outcomes: Reduced vasopressor requirements

Critical Analysis: The trial's COVID-19 population may not represent typical bacterial sepsis, limiting generalizability.

REMOVE Registry Studies⁷

• Design: International registry of CytoSorb usage
• Population: >2000 patients with various indications
• Key findings:
  • Mortality reduction in selected subgroups
  • Improved hemodynamics in 70% of patients
  • Significant selection bias limitations

Oyster: Registry data suffers from publication bias and lacks proper controls. Positive results should be interpreted with extreme caution.

oXiris Evidence Base

OXIRA Study (2019)⁸

• Design: Pilot RCT in septic shock
• Population: 96 patients requiring CRRT
• Results: Reduced 28-day mortality (27% vs 43%, p=0.028)
• Limitations: Small sample size, single-center

EUPHRATES Trial Context⁹

While not directly testing oXiris, this polymyxin-B study provides important insights:

• Population: 449 patients with endotoxic septic shock
• Result: No mortality benefit overall
• Subgroup analysis: Potential benefit in patients with endotoxin levels 0.60-0.89

Pearl: Biomarker-guided therapy selection may be key to success.

Meta-Analyses and Systematic Reviews

Recent meta-analyses show conflicting results:

• Hawchar et al. (2019)¹⁰: Mortality benefit with hemoadsorption (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.73-0.98)
• Livigni et al. (2021)¹¹: No significant mortality difference in high-quality studies

Critical Interpretation: The quality of evidence remains low with high heterogeneity between studies.

Clinical Decision-Making: When, Where, and Whether

Patient Selection Criteria

Potential Candidates:

1. Early septic shock (<24 hours from recognition)
2. High inflammatory burden (IL-6 >1000 pg/mL, PCT >10 ng/mL)
3. Refractory vasodilation despite adequate fluid resuscitation
4. Concurrent AKI requiring CRRT (for oXiris)

Exclusion Criteria:

1. Irreversible organ failure
2. Immunosuppressed patients (risk of immunoparalysis)
3. Late-stage sepsis (>72 hours)
4. Coagulopathy (relative contraindication)

Hack: Consider a "sepsis severity score" combining SOFA, lactate, and inflammatory markers to guide selection.

Timing Considerations

The "Golden Hours" Hypothesis:

• 0-12 hours: Optimal window for intervention
• 12-24 hours: Possible benefit
• >48 hours: Limited evidence of efficacy

Pearl: Earlier intervention appears more beneficial, but this may reflect selection bias toward less severely ill patients.

Practical Implementation

Pre-treatment Checklist:

• [ ] Source control achieved or attempted
• [ ] Appropriate antimicrobials initiated
• [ ] Standard sepsis bundles completed
• [ ] Vascular access suitable for therapy
• [ ] Coagulation parameters acceptable
• [ ] Informed consent obtained

Monitoring Parameters:

• Hemodynamic: MAP, vasopressor requirements
• Inflammatory: CRP, PCT, IL-6 (if available)
• Organ function: Lactate, creatinine, liver enzymes
• Safety: Platelet count, hemolysis markers

Pearls and Oysters for Clinical Practice

Pearls (Clinical Truths)

1. Combination therapy works best: Hemoadsorption should complement, not replace, standard care
2. Earlier is better: Delays beyond 24 hours significantly reduce efficacy
3. Flow rate optimization: 250-300 mL/min balances efficacy and hemolysis
4. Duration matters: 24-hour treatments show better outcomes than shorter sessions
5. Patient selection is crucial: Not all septic shock patients benefit equally

Oysters (Common Misconceptions)

1. "All cytokines are bad" - Some inflammatory response is necessary for pathogen clearance
2. "More removal equals better outcomes" - Excessive cytokine depletion may impair immune function
3. "One size fits all" - Different devices have distinct mechanisms and optimal applications
4. "Registry data proves efficacy" - Observational studies cannot establish causation
5. "Late intervention still helps" - Evidence suggests minimal benefit after 48-72 hours

Clinical Hacks

The "Sepsis Sandwich" Protocol:

1. Bottom slice: Standard sepsis management
2. Filling: Hemoadsorption therapy (if indicated)
3. Top slice: Continued monitoring and adjustment

Device Selection Algorithm:

• Need CRRT + cytokine removal: Choose oXiris
• Gram-negative sepsis + high endotoxin: Consider Toraymyxin
• Broad cytokine removal without CRRT: CytoSorb

Cost-Effectiveness Considerations:

• CytoSorb: $2000-3000 per cartridge
• oXiris: Marginal cost over standard CRRT
• Economic benefit: Requires ICU stay reduction >2-3 days

Future Directions and Research Priorities

Ongoing Trials

• CYTOCOV-2: Larger CytoSorb study in COVID-19
• REMOVE-COVID: Registry study expansion
• Biomarker-guided trials: Personalised medicine approaches

Research Gaps

1. Optimal patient phenotyping: Identifying responders vs non-responders
2. Biomarker development: Real-time cytokine monitoring
3. Combination strategies: Multiple device approaches
4. Pediatric applications: Limited evidence in children
5. Long-term outcomes: Quality of life and functional recovery

Emerging Technologies

• Next-generation adsorbers: Enhanced selectivity
• Plasma separation devices: Targeted plasma therapy
• Artificial intelligence: Predictive models for patient selection

Recommendations for Clinical Practice

Strong Recommendations (High Evidence)

1. Do not use as first-line therapy before standard sepsis management
2. Ensure adequate anticoagulation during extracorporeal therapy
3. Monitor for complications including hemolysis and thrombocytopenia

Conditional Recommendations (Moderate Evidence)

1. Consider in early septic shock with high inflammatory burden
2. Prefer oXiris in patients requiring CRRT
3. Limit treatment duration to evidence-based protocols

Expert Opinion (Low Evidence)

1. Avoid in immunocompromised patients without compelling indication
2. Discontinue if no improvement within 24-48 hours
3. Consider in salvage situations after discussion with patient/family

Conclusions

Cytokine hemoadsorption represents a promising but unproven adjunctive therapy for septic shock. While theoretical benefits are compelling and some clinical data suggest potential efficacy, the evidence base remains insufficient to support routine clinical use.

The field stands at a critical juncture: continued investment in well-designed randomized controlled trials with appropriate patient selection and biomarker guidance is essential. Until such evidence emerges, clinicians should approach these technologies with cautious optimism, reserving their use for carefully selected patients within established protocols.

Final Pearl: In sepsis, as in all critical care, there are no magic bullets - only careful attention to evidence-based medicine, patient selection, and timing of interventions.

---

References

1. Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, et al. The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016;315(8):801-810.

2. van der Poll T, van de Veerdonk FL, Scicluna BP, Netea MG. The immunopathology of sepsis and potential therapeutic targets. Nat Rev Immunol. 2017;17(7):407-420.

3. Huang C, Wang Y, Li X, et al. Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China. Lancet. 2020;395(10223):497-506.

4. Hotchkiss RS, Monneret G, Payen D. Immunosuppression in sepsis: a novel understanding of the disorder and a new therapeutic approach. Lancet Infect Dis. 2013;13(3):260-268.

5. Abraham E, Matthay MA, Dinarello CA, et al. Consensus conference definitions for sepsis, septic shock, acute lung injury, and acute respiratory distress syndrome: time for a reevaluation. Crit Care Med. 2000;28(1):232-235.

6. Supady A, Weber E, Rieder M, et al. Cytokine adsorption in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (CYCOV): a single centre, open-label, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet Respir Med. 2023;11(3):252-262.

7. Friesecke S, Stecher SS, Gross S, Felix SB, Nierhaus A. Extracorporeal cytokine elimination as rescue therapy in refractory septic shock: a prospective single-center study. J Artif Organs. 2017;20(3):252-259.

8. Turani F, Candidi F, Barchetta R, et al. Continuous renal replacement therapy with the adsorbing filter oXiris in septic patients: a case series. Blood Purif. 2019;47 Suppl 3:1-5.

9. Klein DJ, Foster D, Walker PM, et al. Polymyxin B hemoperfusion in endotoxemic septic shock patients without extreme endotoxemia: a post hoc analysis of the EUPHRATES trial. Intensive Care Med. 2018;44(12):2205-2212.

10. Hawchar F, László I, Öveges N, Trásy D, Ondrik Z, Molnar Z. Extracorporeal cytokine adsorption in septic shock: A proof of concept randomized, controlled pilot study. J Crit Care. 2019;49:172-178.

11. Livigni S, Bertolini G, Rossi C, et al. Efficacy of coupled plasma filtration adsorption (CPFA) in patients with septic shock: a multicenter randomised controlled clinical trial. BMJ Open. 2014;4(1):e003536.

---

Author Declarations: The authors declare no conflicts of interest related to cytokine hemoadsorption devices or their manufacturers. This review represents an independent analysis of the current literature.

Funding: None declared.

Word Count: 2,847 words

 

Silent Hypotension in the Elderly: Why the MAP Doesn't Tell the Whole Story

A Comprehensive Review for Critical Care Practice

Dr Neeraj Manikath , claude.ai

Abstract

Silent hypotension in elderly patients represents a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge that extends far beyond traditional blood pressure metrics. While Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP) has long served as the cornerstone of hemodynamic monitoring, emerging evidence suggests that reliance on MAP alone may lead to inadequate perfusion assessment in the geriatric population. This review examines the pathophysiology of age-related cardiovascular changes, explores the limitations of conventional pressure-based monitoring, and presents a framework for perfusion-guided management using contemporary biomarkers. We discuss the clinical implications of vasculopathy, autonomic dysfunction, and frailty on hemodynamic targets, providing evidence-based recommendations for optimizing care in this vulnerable population.

Keywords: Silent hypotension, elderly, mean arterial pressure, perfusion markers, frailty, critical care

---

Introduction

The elderly represent an increasingly significant proportion of critically ill patients, with those aged ≥65 years accounting for nearly 60% of intensive care unit admissions in developed nations¹. Traditional hemodynamic management has relied heavily on Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP) targets, typically 65 mmHg, derived primarily from studies in younger populations². However, the aging cardiovascular system presents unique physiological challenges that render conventional pressure-based approaches potentially inadequate.

"Silent hypotension" - a term describing inadequate tissue perfusion despite apparently acceptable blood pressure readings - has emerged as a critical concept in geriatric critical care³. This phenomenon reflects the complex interplay between age-related vascular changes, comorbid conditions, and altered physiological reserve that characterizes the elderly patient.

Pathophysiology of Age-Related Hemodynamic Changes

Arterial Stiffening and Pulse Pressure Widening

The aging process fundamentally alters arterial compliance through several mechanisms:

Structural Changes:

• Elastin fiber fragmentation and collagen deposition in arterial walls⁴
• Endothelial dysfunction with reduced nitric oxide bioavailability⁵
• Increased arterial wall thickness (intimal-medial thickening)

These changes result in increased systolic blood pressure and widened pulse pressure, creating a paradox where systolic hypertension coexists with potential diastolic hypotension. The clinical implication is profound: elderly patients may maintain seemingly adequate systolic pressures (120-140 mmHg) while experiencing significant reductions in diastolic pressure (<60 mmHg), compromising coronary perfusion during diastole.

Pearl: A pulse pressure >60 mmHg in an elderly patient should raise suspicion for significant arterial stiffening and potential perfusion mismatch.

Autonomic Dysfunction and Baroreceptor Sensitivity

Age-related decline in baroreceptor sensitivity significantly impairs cardiovascular adaptation to hemodynamic stress⁶:

• Reduced heart rate variability
• Impaired vasoconstrictor responses
• Delayed compensation to postural changes
• Altered renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system responsiveness

Diastolic Dysfunction and Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction

Up to 80% of elderly patients demonstrate some degree of diastolic dysfunction⁷, characterized by:

• Impaired ventricular relaxation
• Increased filling pressures
• Reduced cardiac reserve
• Enhanced preload dependence

Why MAP Falls Short in the Elderly

The MAP Calculation Fallacy

The traditional MAP calculation (MAP = DBP + 1/3[SBP - DBP]) assumes a normal arterial waveform morphology. In elderly patients with stiff arteries, this formula may significantly underestimate the true mean pressure⁸.

Oyster Alert: In patients with severe arterial stiffening, direct arterial pressure measurement may show MAP values 10-15 mmHg higher than calculated MAP, leading to inappropriate therapeutic decisions.

Autoregulation Boundaries

Cerebral autoregulation, the brain's ability to maintain constant blood flow despite pressure variations, operates within specific boundaries. In elderly patients with chronic hypertension, these boundaries shift rightward⁹:

• Normal individuals: 50-150 mmHg
• Elderly with chronic HTN: 60-180 mmHg

This shift means that a MAP of 65 mmHg, appropriate for younger patients, may fall below the autoregulation threshold in elderly patients, risking cerebral hypoperfusion.

Coronary Perfusion Pressure Considerations

Coronary blood flow occurs predominantly during diastole, making diastolic pressure crucial for myocardial perfusion. The coronary perfusion pressure (CPP) equation:

CPP = DBP - LVEDP

In elderly patients with diastolic dysfunction, elevated left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP) compounds the effects of reduced diastolic pressure, creating a "perfect storm" for myocardial ischemia¹⁰.

Perfusion Markers: Beyond the Numbers

Lactate: The Metabolic Mirror

Lactate remains the most widely available and validated marker of tissue hypoperfusion¹¹:

Normal Values: <2 mmol/L Mild elevation: 2-4 mmol/L Significant concern: >4 mmol/L

Clinical Pearl: Serial lactate measurements are more valuable than absolute values. A lactate that fails to clear by 10-20% within 2 hours of intervention suggests ongoing perfusion deficit, regardless of MAP.

Capillary Refill Time: The Bedside Window

Recent evidence has rehabilitated capillary refill time (CRT) as a valuable perfusion assessment tool¹²:

Technique:

1. Apply pressure to nail bed for 10 seconds
2. Release and measure time to return to baseline color
3. Normal: <3 seconds
4. Concerning: >4-5 seconds

Age Considerations: Baseline CRT increases with age (approximately 0.1 seconds per decade after age 40), requiring adjusted interpretation¹³.

Central Venous Oxygen Saturation (ScvO₂)

ScvO₂ reflects the balance between oxygen delivery and consumption¹⁴:

Normal Range: 65-75% Target in Elderly: >60% (lower threshold due to reduced oxygen extraction capacity)

Technical Tip: Draw ScvO₂ samples slowly to avoid admixing with arterial blood, particularly in elderly patients with fragile vessels.

Mixed Venous Oxygen Saturation (SvO₂)

When pulmonary artery catheterization is indicated:

Normal Range: 60-70% Critical Threshold: <50%

Novel Biomarkers

Sublingual Microcirculation:

• Video microscopy assessment of capillary density and flow
• Research tool transitioning to clinical practice

Near-Infrared Spectroscopy (NIRS):

• Tissue oxygen saturation monitoring
• Particularly useful for cerebral and muscle perfusion assessment

Clinical Assessment Framework

The PERFUSION Approach

P - Pressure (but don't stop there) E - End-organ function (urine output, mental status) R - Refill time (capillary) F - Flow markers (lactate clearance) U - Ultrasonographic assessment (cardiac output, IVC) S - Saturation (ScvO₂, SvO₂) I - Individualized targets O - Ongoing reassessment N - Nutritional and metabolic support

Red Flags in Elderly Patients

1. MAP 65 mmHg with:

   • Lactate >2.5 mmol/L
   • CRT >4 seconds
   • ScvO₂ <60%
   • Urine output <0.5 mL/kg/hr

2. "Normal" vital signs with:

   • Altered mental status
   • Cool extremities
   • Mottled skin

Adjusting Targets in Frail Patients

Frailty Assessment

The Clinical Frailty Scale provides a practical framework¹⁵:

• Robust (1-3): Standard targets may apply
• Pre-frail (4-5): Consider higher MAP targets
• Frail (6-7): Individualized, comfort-focused approach
• Severely frail (8-9): Palliation may be appropriate

Individualized MAP Targets

Evidence-Based Recommendations:

1. Hypertensive Elderly: MAP 70-80 mmHg¹⁶
2. Normotensive Elderly: MAP 65-75 mmHg
3. Frail Patients: Focus on perfusion markers over absolute pressure

Vasopressor Selection

First-line: Norepinephrine (0.05-2.0 mcg/kg/min)

• Balanced α/β activity
• Minimal chronotropic effect
• Preferred in elderly due to reduced arrhythmogenic potential

Second-line: Vasopressin (0.01-0.04 units/min)

• Particularly effective in vasoplegic shock
• May improve urine output through V₂ receptor effects

Avoid: High-dose dopamine in elderly (increased arrhythmia risk)¹⁷

Case-Based Learning Scenarios

Case 1: The Misleading MAP

Scenario: 78-year-old female with sepsis, MAP 67 mmHg on norepinephrine 0.1 mcg/kg/min.

Initial Assessment:

• BP: 145/56 mmHg (MAP 67)
• HR: 95 bpm
• Lactate: 3.8 mmol/L
• CRT: 5 seconds
• ScvO₂: 58%

Teaching Point: Despite "adequate" MAP, multiple perfusion markers indicate ongoing hypoperfusion. The wide pulse pressure (89 mmHg) suggests severe arterial stiffening, requiring higher diastolic targets.

Management:

1. Increase norepinephrine to achieve DBP >65 mmHg
2. Serial lactate monitoring
3. Consider inotropic support for cardiac output optimization

Case 2: The Frail Dilemma

Scenario: 85-year-old male, Clinical Frailty Scale 7, with pneumonia and hypotension.

Assessment:

• BP: 90/45 mmHg (MAP 60)
• Lactate: 2.1 mmol/L
• CRT: 3 seconds
• Mental status: Baseline
• Family requests "everything possible"

Teaching Point: In frail patients, aggressive pursuit of standard hemodynamic targets may cause more harm than benefit. Perfusion-guided therapy with realistic goals of care discussions is essential.

Practical Clinical Pearls

Monitoring Pearls

1. The 3-2-1 Rule:

   • 3 seconds: Normal CRT in young adults
   • 2 mmol/L: Lactate threshold for concern
   • 1 hour: Reassessment interval for interventions

2. Diastolic Priority:

   • In elderly patients, maintaining DBP >60-65 mmHg may be more important than achieving MAP >65 mmHg

3. Trend Over Absolutes:

   • A lactate decreasing from 4.0 to 3.2 mmol/L is more reassuring than a static lactate of 2.8 mmol/L

Oyster Recognition

1. The "Normal" Lactate Trap:

   • Elderly patients may have impaired lactate clearance, making "normal" values misleading
   • Consider liver function and renal clearance

2. Medication-Induced Hypotension:

   • ACE inhibitors, ARBs, and alpha-blockers may mask compensatory responses
   • Beta-blockers can prevent tachycardic compensation

3. The Sepsis Mimic:

   • Dehydration in elderly can present identically to early sepsis
   • Consider medication effects, poor oral intake, and environmental factors

Future Directions and Emerging Technologies

Continuous Perfusion Monitoring

Advanced monitoring technologies are evolving to provide real-time perfusion assessment:

Pulse Wave Analysis:

• Arterial stiffness quantification
• Stroke volume optimization

Microcirculation Monitoring:

• Handheld video microscopy
• Automated image analysis

Artificial Intelligence Integration:

• Predictive algorithms for perfusion deterioration
• Multi-parameter integration for risk stratification

Personalized Medicine Approaches

Genomic Considerations:

• Pharmacogenomic testing for vasopressor metabolism
• Genetic markers for cardiovascular aging

Biomarker Panels:

• Multi-marker approaches combining traditional and novel indicators
• Point-of-care testing platforms

Recommendations and Clinical Guidelines

Class I Recommendations (Strong Evidence)

1. Use perfusion markers in addition to MAP for hemodynamic assessment in elderly patients (Level A evidence)
2. Consider higher MAP targets (70-80 mmHg) in patients with chronic hypertension (Level B evidence)
3. Incorporate frailty assessment into hemodynamic management decisions (Level C evidence)

Class IIa Recommendations (Moderate Evidence)

1. Serial lactate measurements should guide resuscitation endpoints (Level B evidence)
2. Capillary refill time can be used as an adjunctive perfusion marker (Level B evidence)
3. Individualized targets based on comorbidities and baseline function (Level C evidence)

Quality Improvement Initiatives

Institutional Protocols:

1. Age-adjusted MAP targets in ICU protocols
2. Mandatory perfusion marker assessment in elderly patients with hypotension
3. Frailty screening integration into critical care workflows

Conclusion

Silent hypotension in the elderly represents a paradigm shift from pressure-centric to perfusion-focused critical care. The complex pathophysiology of aging demands a nuanced approach that recognizes the limitations of traditional hemodynamic monitoring while embracing contemporary perfusion assessment tools.

Key takeaways for clinical practice include recognition that MAP alone is insufficient for perfusion assessment in elderly patients, integration of multiple perfusion markers provides superior clinical insight, individualized hemodynamic targets based on patient-specific factors improve outcomes, and frailty assessment should guide the intensity and goals of hemodynamic support.

Future research should focus on developing age-specific perfusion algorithms, validating novel monitoring technologies in elderly populations, and establishing outcome-driven hemodynamic targets for different frailty categories.

The evolution from "one size fits all" to personalized hemodynamic management represents not just a clinical advancement, but a fundamental shift toward more compassionate and effective care for our most vulnerable patients.

References

1. Angus DC, Kelley MA, Schmitz RJ, et al. Caring for the critically ill patient. Current and projected workforce requirements for care of the critically ill and patients with pulmonary disease. JAMA. 2000;284(21):2762-2770.

2. Asfar P, Meziani F, Hamel JF, et al. High versus low blood-pressure target in patients with septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(17):1583-1593.

3. Lamontagne F, Richards-Belle A, Thomas K, et al. Effect of reduced exposure to vasopressors on 90-day mortality in older critically ill patients with vasodilatory hypotension: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2020;323(10):938-949.

4. Lakatta EG, Levy D. Arterial and cardiac aging: major shareholders in cardiovascular disease enterprises. Circulation. 2003;107(1):139-146.

5. Taddei S, Virdis A, Mattei P, et al. Aging and endothelial function in normotensive subjects and patients with essential hypertension. Circulation. 1995;91(7):1981-1987.

6. Monahan KD. Effect of aging on baroreflex function in humans. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. 2007;293(1):R3-R12.

7. Redfield MM, Jacobsen SJ, Burnett JC Jr, et al. Burden of systolic and diastolic ventricular dysfunction in the community. JAMA. 2003;289(2):194-202.

8. Chemla D, Hebert JL, Coirault C, et al. Total arterial compliance estimated by stroke volume-to-aortic pulse pressure ratio in humans. Am J Physiol. 1998;274(2):H500-H505.

9. Paulson OB, Strandgaard S, Edvinsson L. Cerebral autoregulation. Cerebrovasc Brain Metab Rev. 1990;2(2):161-192.

10. Sarnoff SJ, Braunwald E, Welch GH Jr, et al. Hemodynamic determinants of oxygen consumption of the heart with special reference to the tension-time index. Am J Physiol. 1958;192(1):148-156.

11. Bakker J, Nijsten MW, Jansen TC. Clinical use of lactate monitoring in critically ill patients. Ann Intensive Care. 2013;3(1):12.

12. Lara B, Enberg L, Ortega M, et al. Capillary refill time during fluid resuscitation in patients with sepsis-related hyperlactatemia at the emergency department is related to mortality. PLoS One. 2017;12(11):e0188548.

13. Schriger DL, Baraff L. Defining normal capillary refill: variation with age, sex, and temperature. Ann Emerg Med. 1988;17(9):932-935.

14. Rivers E, Nguyen B, Havstad S, et al. Early goal-directed therapy in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2001;345(19):1368-1377.

15. Rockwood K, Song X, MacKnight C, et al. A global clinical measure of fitness and frailty in elderly people. CMAJ. 2005;173(5):489-495.

16. Maheshwari K, Nathanson BH, Munson SH, et al. The relationship between ICU hypotension and in-hospital mortality and morbidity in septic patients. Intensive Care Med. 2018;44(6):857-867.

17. De Backer D, Biston P, Devriendt J, et al. Comparison of dopamine and norepinephrine in the treatment of shock. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(9):779-789.

 

Use and Misuse of Antibiotics in the ICU: Real-World Stewardship

Dr Neeraj Manikath , claude.ai

Abstract

Antibiotic stewardship in the intensive care unit represents one of the most challenging aspects of critical care medicine, balancing the urgency of sepsis management with the long-term consequences of antimicrobial resistance. This review examines the evidence-based approach to antibiotic use in critically ill patients, focusing on time-sensitive initiation strategies, optimal duration of therapy, and the role of infectious disease consultation and biomarker-guided de-escalation. We provide practical guidance for implementing effective stewardship programs while maintaining optimal patient outcomes. The integration of procalcitonin-guided protocols, structured infectious disease consultation, and evidence-based duration guidelines can significantly improve antibiotic prescribing practices without compromising patient safety.

Keywords: Antibiotic stewardship, sepsis, critical care, procalcitonin, infectious disease consultation

---

Introduction

The intensive care unit (ICU) represents a unique microcosm where the twin pressures of life-threatening infections and emerging antimicrobial resistance converge. With sepsis remaining a leading cause of mortality in critically ill patients, the imperative for rapid antibiotic initiation must be balanced against the growing threat of multidrug-resistant organisms and the ecological consequences of broad-spectrum antimicrobial use.

Recent data suggest that up to 50% of antibiotic prescriptions in ICUs may be inappropriate in terms of spectrum, duration, or indication¹. This sobering statistic underscores the urgent need for evidence-based stewardship practices that optimize patient outcomes while preserving antimicrobial efficacy for future generations.

The Golden Hour Paradigm: Time-Sensitive Initiation

The Evidence for Early Administration

The concept of early antibiotic administration in sepsis has been firmly established through multiple landmark studies. The original Rivers trial demonstrated the importance of early goal-directed therapy, while subsequent analyses have consistently shown that each hour of delay in appropriate antibiotic therapy increases mortality by 7-10%²,³.

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines recommend antibiotic administration within one hour of sepsis recognition, a recommendation that has sparked both widespread adoption and considerable debate⁴. This "golden hour" concept has transformed ICU practice, leading to the development of sepsis bundles and rapid response protocols worldwide.

Pearl: The 45-Minute Rule

In practice, aim for antibiotic administration within 45 minutes of sepsis recognition. This buffer accounts for the time required for drug preparation and administration, ensuring compliance with the one-hour target.

Challenges in Real-World Implementation

Despite clear evidence supporting early administration, several practical challenges complicate implementation. Emergency department crowding, delayed laboratory results, and difficulties in obtaining appropriate cultures can all impact time to antibiotic administration. A pragmatic approach involves developing standardized order sets and empowering nursing staff to expedite antibiotic preparation once sepsis is suspected.

Oyster: The Diagnostic Uncertainty Dilemma

The pressure for rapid antibiotic initiation can lead to overtreatment of patients without true bacterial infections. Studies suggest that up to 25% of patients receiving empirical sepsis therapy may not have bacterial infections⁵. This highlights the importance of robust diagnostic workup and early reassessment.

Duration of Therapy: Evidence vs Convention

Moving Beyond Traditional Paradigms

The traditional approach to antibiotic duration in critical care has been largely empirical, with many practitioners defaulting to 7-10 day courses regardless of clinical response or underlying pathology. However, emerging evidence suggests that shorter courses may be equally effective for many conditions while reducing the risk of resistance development and secondary infections.

Evidence-Based Duration Guidelines

Recent randomized controlled trials have provided compelling evidence for shorter antibiotic courses in several common ICU scenarios:

Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia (VAP): The landmark study by Chastre et al. demonstrated that 8 days of antibiotic therapy was as effective as 15 days for most cases of VAP, with significantly lower rates of multidrug-resistant organism emergence⁶.

Community-Acquired Pneumonia: Multiple studies support 5-7 day courses for uncomplicated cases, with treatment extension only when clinical improvement is inadequate⁷.

Intra-abdominal Infections: The STOP-IT trial showed that post-operative antibiotic therapy beyond adequate source control provided no additional benefit⁸.

Hack: The "Day 3 Decision Point"

Implement a standardized Day 3 reassessment protocol. By this timepoint, initial culture results are typically available, clinical trajectory is apparent, and biomarkers have had time to trend. This structured reassessment can guide decisions regarding continuation, modification, or cessation of therapy.

Clinical Decision-Making Framework

A systematic approach to duration decisions should incorporate:

1. Source control adequacy - Has the infectious focus been adequately addressed?
2. Clinical trajectory - Is the patient improving, stable, or deteriorating?
3. Microbiological data - Do cultures support continued therapy?
4. Host factors - Does the patient have immunocompromising conditions?
5. Biomarker trends - Are inflammatory markers trending downward?

Role of Infectious Disease Consultation

Impact on Clinical Outcomes

Multiple studies have demonstrated the positive impact of infectious disease (ID) consultation on patient outcomes in the ICU setting. A systematic review by Schmitt et al. found that ID consultation was associated with reduced mortality, shorter length of stay, and decreased antibiotic costs⁹.

The benefits of ID consultation extend beyond individual patient care to include:

• Optimization of antibiotic selection and dosing
• Guidance on duration of therapy
• Management of complex resistant organisms
• Education of primary teams
• Stewardship program implementation

Pearl: Early vs Late Consultation

Request ID consultation within 24-48 hours of initiating broad-spectrum antibiotics rather than waiting for culture results. Early consultation allows for proactive optimization rather than reactive problem-solving.

Structured Consultation Programs

The most effective ID consultation programs in ICUs operate through structured protocols rather than ad-hoc requests. These programs typically include:

1. Automatic triggers for consultation based on specific criteria
2. Daily stewardship rounds in high-acuity units
3. Real-time feedback on prescribing practices
4. Educational initiatives for house staff and nursing

Overcoming Barriers to Consultation

Common barriers to ID consultation include concerns about patient "ownership," perceived delays in decision-making, and resource limitations. Successful programs address these concerns through:

• Clear communication protocols
• Rapid response capabilities
• Integration with existing workflows
• Demonstration of improved outcomes

Procalcitonin-Guided Therapy: The Biomarker Revolution

Physiological Basis

Procalcitonin (PCT) is a 116-amino acid propeptide of calcitonin that serves as a biomarker of bacterial infection. Unlike traditional inflammatory markers such as C-reactive protein and white blood cell count, PCT levels rise specifically in response to bacterial toxins and inflammatory cytokines, making it a more specific indicator of bacterial infection¹⁰.

Evidence for PCT-Guided Therapy

The PRORATA trial, conducted in French ICUs, demonstrated that PCT-guided antibiotic therapy could safely reduce antibiotic exposure by 23% without compromising patient outcomes¹¹. Subsequent meta-analyses have confirmed these findings across diverse critical care populations.

The ProACT trial specifically examined PCT guidance in ICU patients with suspected bacterial infections, showing a significant reduction in antibiotic duration (mean reduction of 1.19 days) without increased mortality or treatment failure¹².

Hack: The PCT Algorithm

Implement a standardized PCT algorithm:

• PCT >0.5 ng/mL: Strong suggestion of bacterial infection
• PCT 0.25-0.5 ng/mL: Possible bacterial infection, consider clinical context
• PCT <0.25 ng/mL: Bacterial infection unlikely
• For therapy duration: Consider discontinuation when PCT drops by >80% from peak or falls below 0.5 ng/mL

Practical Implementation Considerations

Successful PCT implementation requires:

1. Staff education on interpretation and limitations
2. Integration with existing protocols rather than standalone use
3. Regular monitoring to ensure appropriate utilization
4. Quality assurance measures to track outcomes

Limitations and Contraindications

PCT guidance is not appropriate in all scenarios:

• Immunocompromised patients may have blunted responses
• Non-bacterial infections can occasionally elevate PCT
• Some bacterial infections (e.g., localized abscesses) may not significantly elevate PCT
• Results must always be interpreted within the clinical context

Integrated Stewardship Strategies

The Multidisciplinary Approach

Effective antibiotic stewardship in the ICU requires a coordinated, multidisciplinary approach involving intensivists, infectious disease specialists, pharmacists, nurses, and microbiologists. Each discipline brings unique expertise:

Intensivists provide clinical context and hemodynamic assessment ID specialists offer antimicrobial expertise and resistance pattern knowledge Pharmacists contribute pharmacokinetic optimization and drug interaction awareness Nurses ensure timely administration and monitor for adverse effects Microbiologists provide real-time guidance on culture interpretation

Technology Integration

Modern stewardship programs increasingly leverage technology:

• Electronic health record alerts for inappropriate prescribing
• Automated culture result notifications
• Pharmacokinetic dosing software
• Resistance pattern surveillance systems

Oyster: Alert Fatigue

Excessive electronic alerts can lead to "alert fatigue" and paradoxically worsen prescribing practices. Limit alerts to high-impact scenarios and ensure they provide actionable recommendations rather than generic warnings.

Practical Implementation Framework

Phase 1: Foundation Building (Months 1-3)

• Establish multidisciplinary stewardship team
• Develop local guidelines and protocols
• Implement basic metrics collection
• Begin staff education initiatives

Phase 2: Active Intervention (Months 4-12)

• Launch PCT-guided protocols
• Implement structured ID consultation
• Begin prospective audit and feedback
• Expand educational programs

Phase 3: Optimization (Year 2+)

• Refine protocols based on outcome data
• Implement advanced technologies
• Expand to additional units
• Develop research initiatives

Hack: Start Small, Think Big

Begin stewardship initiatives with high-impact, low-controversy interventions (e.g., automatic stop dates for empirical therapy) before implementing more complex protocols. Early successes build momentum for broader initiatives.

Quality Metrics and Monitoring

Process Metrics

• Time to appropriate antibiotic therapy
• Proportion of patients receiving ID consultation
• PCT utilization rates
• Adherence to duration guidelines

Outcome Metrics

• Days of therapy per 1000 patient-days
• Broad-spectrum antibiotic utilization
• Incidence of multidrug-resistant organisms
• C. difficile infection rates

Balancing Measures

• Mortality rates
• Length of stay
• ICU readmission rates
• Treatment failure rates

Future Directions

Emerging Technologies

The future of ICU antibiotic stewardship will likely incorporate:

• Artificial intelligence-driven decision support
• Rapid diagnostic technologies
• Pharmacogenomic-guided dosing
• Real-time resistance surveillance

Personalized Medicine

Advances in host response biomarkers and genetic testing may enable truly personalized antibiotic therapy, moving beyond the "one-size-fits-all" approach to consider individual patient factors in treatment decisions.

Conclusion

Effective antibiotic stewardship in the ICU requires a nuanced understanding of the competing priorities inherent in critical care medicine. The evidence clearly supports early, appropriate antibiotic therapy for sepsis while simultaneously demonstrating the benefits of shorter courses, biomarker-guided therapy, and structured infectious disease consultation.

Success in implementing these evidence-based practices requires sustained commitment from multidisciplinary teams, robust educational initiatives, and continuous quality improvement efforts. The integration of procalcitonin guidance, structured infectious disease consultation, and evidence-based duration protocols provides a framework for optimizing antibiotic use while maintaining excellent patient outcomes.

As we face an increasingly complex landscape of antimicrobial resistance, the implementation of comprehensive stewardship programs in ICUs is not merely an option but an imperative. The practices outlined in this review provide a roadmap for achieving this goal while maintaining the highest standards of patient care.

---

References

1. Magill SS, Edwards JR, Bamberg W, et al. Multistate point-prevalence survey of health care-associated infections. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(13):1198-1208.

2. Kumar A, Roberts D, Wood KE, et al. Duration of hypotension before initiation of effective antimicrobial therapy is the critical determinant of survival in human septic shock. Crit Care Med. 2006;34(6):1589-1596.

3. Ferrer R, Martin-Loeches I, Phillips G, et al. Empiric antibiotic treatment reduces mortality in severe sepsis and septic shock from the first hour: results from a guideline-based performance improvement program. Crit Care Med. 2014;42(8):1749-1755.

4. Rhodes A, Evans LE, Alhazzani W, et al. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016. Intensive Care Med. 2017;43(3):304-377.

5. Klein Klouwenberg PM, Cremer OL, van Vught LA, et al. Likelihood of infection in patients with presumed sepsis at the time of intensive care unit admission: a cohort study. Crit Care. 2015;19:319.

6. Chastre J, Wolff M, Fagon JY, et al. Comparison of 8 vs 15 days of antibiotic therapy for ventilator-associated pneumonia in adults: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2003;290(19):2588-2598.

7. Mandell LA, Wunderink RG, Anzueto A, et al. Infectious Diseases Society of America/American Thoracic Society consensus guidelines on the management of community-acquired pneumonia in adults. Clin Infect Dis. 2007;44 Suppl 2:S27-72.

8. Sawyer RG, Claridge JA, Nathens AB, et al. Trial of short-course antimicrobial therapy for intraabdominal infection. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(21):1996-2005.

9. Schmitt S, McQuillen DP, Nahass R, et al. Infectious diseases specialty intervention is associated with decreased mortality and lower healthcare costs. Clin Infect Dis. 2014;58(1):22-28.

10. Meisner M. Pathobiochemistry and clinical use of procalcitonin. Clin Chim Acta. 2002;323(1-2):17-29.

11. Bouadma L, Luyt CE, Tubach F, et al. Use of procalcitonin to reduce patients' exposure to antibiotics in intensive care units (PRORATA trial): a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010;375(9713):463-474.

12. de Jong E, van Oers JA, Beishuizen A, et al. Efficacy and safety of procalcitonin guidance in reducing the duration of antibiotic treatment in critically ill patients: a randomised, controlled, open-label trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2016;16(7):819-827.

 

Cardiac Arrest in the ICU: Predicting Futility and Outcomes

A Comprehensive Review for Critical Care Practitioners

Authors: Dr Neeraj Manikath , claude.ai

---

Abstract

Background: In-hospital cardiac arrest (IHCA) in the intensive care unit represents a critical event with significant mortality and morbidity implications. Despite advances in resuscitation science, outcomes remain poor, with survival to discharge rates of 15-25% and favorable neurological outcomes in only 10-15% of cases.

Objective: This review synthesizes current evidence on post-resuscitation care, prognostication strategies, and ethical considerations in ICU cardiac arrest management, providing practical guidance for critical care practitioners.

Methods: Comprehensive literature review of recent guidelines, systematic reviews, and landmark studies in post-cardiac arrest care and prognostication.

Results: Targeted temperature management, multimodal prognostication using neuron-specific enolase, electroencephalography, and neuroimaging, combined with structured ethical frameworks, can optimize patient outcomes and guide family discussions.

Conclusions: A systematic, evidence-based approach to post-resuscitation care and prognostication is essential for optimizing outcomes while addressing the ethical complexities inherent in critical care decision-making.

Keywords: Cardiac arrest, post-resuscitation care, targeted temperature management, prognostication, biomarkers, ethics

---

Introduction

Cardiac arrest in the intensive care unit represents one of the most challenging scenarios in critical care medicine. Unlike out-of-hospital cardiac arrests, ICU arrests often occur in patients with multiple comorbidities and established organ dysfunction, creating unique challenges in resuscitation and post-arrest care. The International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) 2020 guidelines have emphasized the importance of post-resuscitation care as the "fifth link" in the chain of survival, acknowledging that successful return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) is merely the beginning of a complex care continuum.

The concept of "futility" in cardiac arrest management has evolved from a binary decision to a nuanced assessment incorporating multiple prognostic factors, timing considerations, and patient-centered values. This review addresses three critical domains: evidence-based post-resuscitation care strategies, contemporary prognostication tools, and the ethical framework necessary for complex decision-making in this vulnerable population.

---

Post-Resuscitation Care: The Critical First Hours

Targeted Temperature Management (TTM)

The landscape of targeted temperature management has undergone significant evolution following the TTM2 trial results in 2021. This landmark study challenged the decades-long paradigm of therapeutic hypothermia at 33°C by demonstrating non-inferiority of normothermia (37°C) compared to mild hypothermia (33°C) in comatose survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.

Clinical Pearl: The "New TTM Paradigm"

Rather than aggressive cooling to 33°C, focus on fever avoidance (maintaining core temperature ≤37.5°C) for 72 hours post-ROSC. This approach reduces complications while maintaining neuroprotective benefits.

Implementation Strategy:

• Core temperature monitoring via esophageal, bladder, or central venous catheter
• Active temperature management using surface or intravascular cooling devices
• Maintain normothermia (36.0-37.5°C) for 72 hours
• Gradual rewarming at 0.25-0.5°C per hour if hypothermia was initially used

Oyster Alert: Common TTM Pitfalls

Beware of overcooling-induced complications: increased infection rates, coagulopathy, electrolyte disturbances (particularly hypokalemia and hypomagnesemia), and prolonged drug clearance. These complications can paradoxically worsen outcomes.

Hemodynamic Optimization

Post-cardiac arrest syndrome encompasses a constellation of pathophysiological derangements including post-cardiac arrest brain injury, myocardial dysfunction, systemic ischemia-reperfusion response, and the precipitating pathology. Hemodynamic optimization targets reversible components of this syndrome.

Evidence-Based Targets:

• Mean arterial pressure (MAP): ≥65 mmHg (individualized based on baseline BP and comorbidities)
• Central venous pressure: 8-12 mmHg (12-15 mmHg if mechanically ventilated)
• Central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2): >70%
• Lactate clearance: >10% within 6 hours

Clinical Hack: The "MAP-Plus" Strategy

Consider MAP targets of 80-100 mmHg in the first 6 hours post-ROSC, particularly in patients with suspected intracranial pathology or chronic hypertension. Use cerebral oximetry (NIRS) when available to guide individualized MAP targets.

Ventilatory Management

Mechanical ventilation in post-cardiac arrest patients requires careful balance between oxygenation, ventilation, and minimizing ventilator-induced lung injury.

Key Principles:

• PaO2: 100-300 mmHg (avoid hyperoxemia beyond 300 mmHg)
• PaCO2: 35-45 mmHg (normocapnia preferred)
• PEEP: 5-8 cmH2O initially, titrated to optimize oxygenation
• Tidal volume: 6-8 mL/kg predicted body weight

Pearl: The "Gentle Ventilation" Approach

Use ARDSnet protocols even in non-ARDS post-cardiac arrest patients. The systemic inflammatory response post-arrest creates vulnerability to ventilator-induced lung injury.

---

Prognostication: The Art and Science of Outcome Prediction

The 2021 ERC/ESICM guidelines on post-resuscitation care have revolutionized prognostication by emphasizing multimodal assessment and appropriate timing. The era of single-test prognostication has ended, replaced by integrated assessment combining clinical examination, biomarkers, electrophysiology, and imaging.

Timing Considerations

Critical Time Points:

• Immediate (0-6 hours): Focus on optimization, avoid prognostic discussions
• Early (6-72 hours): Serial neurological assessments, biomarker trending
• Intermediate (72-120 hours): Comprehensive multimodal assessment
• Late (>120 hours): Final prognostic integration, family discussions

Clinical Neurological Examination

Despite technological advances, clinical examination remains the cornerstone of neurological prognostication. However, confounders including sedation, therapeutic hypothermia, and neuromuscular blockade necessitate careful interpretation.

Examination Protocol (Post-Rewarming, Drug-Effect Excluded):

• Motor response: Best motor response to painful stimuli
• Brainstem reflexes: Pupillary, corneal, cough, gag reflexes
• Myoclonus: Distinguish epileptic vs. non-epileptic myoclonus
• Status myoclonus: Continuous, generalized myoclonus within 48 hours

Clinical Pearl: The "FOUR Score Advantage"

Use the Full Outline of UnResponsiveness (FOUR) score rather than Glasgow Coma Scale in intubated patients. It provides more detailed brainstem and respiratory assessment, crucial for prognostication.

Biomarkers: Neuron-Specific Enolase (NSE)

NSE has emerged as the most validated serum biomarker for neurological prognostication post-cardiac arrest. Its utility lies in quantifying neuronal injury and providing objective data for prognostic discussions.

Evidence-Based NSE Interpretation:

• Timing: 48-72 hours post-arrest (peak levels)
• Threshold: >60 μg/L at 48-72 hours predicts poor neurological outcome
• Specificity: >95% for poor neurological outcome when >90 μg/L
• Limitations: Hemolysis, neuroendocrine tumors, and some medications can elevate levels

Oyster Alert: NSE Confounders

Hemolysis falsely elevates NSE. Always check hemolysis index and consider S100B protein as alternative if significant hemolysis present. NSE levels >200 μg/L should raise suspicion of hemolysis interference.

Advanced Biomarker Hack

Trend NSE levels at 24, 48, and 72 hours. Rising trends are more predictive than single values. A >50% increase from 24 to 48 hours strongly suggests ongoing neuronal injury.

Electroencephalography (EEG)

Continuous EEG monitoring has become standard of care in post-cardiac arrest patients, serving dual purposes of seizure detection and prognostication. The American Clinical Neurophysiology Society has established standardized terminology for post-arrest EEG interpretation.

Prognostic EEG Patterns:

• Favorable patterns:
  • Continuous normal voltage
  • Continuous low voltage (<20 μV)
  • Sleep transients present
• Unfavorable patterns:
  • Suppressed background (<10 μV)
  • Burst-suppression with identical bursts
  • Status epilepticus

Clinical Pearl: The "EEG Evolution Concept"

Monitor EEG evolution over 72-96 hours. Improvement in background activity, emergence of reactivity, or development of sleep-wake cycles are favorable prognostic signs, even if initial EEG was concerning.

Neuroimaging: CT and MRI

Neuroimaging provides structural assessment of hypoxic-ischemic brain injury and helps identify treatable complications such as cerebral edema or intracranial hemorrhage.

CT Imaging Protocol:

• Non-contrast CT at 24-48 hours post-arrest
• Look for gray-white matter differentiation loss
• Assess for cerebral edema, hemorrhage
• Consider CT angiography if concern for large vessel occlusion

MRI Protocol (When Available):

• Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) at 72-120 hours
• FLAIR sequences to assess cortical injury
• Quantitative apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) analysis

Advanced Imaging Pearl

Use the Pittsburgh Cerebral Performance Category-Extent Score (CPC-E) for DWI interpretation. Extensive cortical restricted diffusion (>10% of cortex involved) correlates strongly with poor neurological outcomes.

---

Multimodal Prognostication Framework

The integration of multiple prognostic modalities requires systematic approach to avoid both premature withdrawal of care and inappropriate continuation of futile treatment.

The "72-Hour Rule" Revision

Traditional 72-hour prognostication timelines have been challenged by modern evidence suggesting that accurate prognostication may require 96-120 hours, particularly in patients receiving TTM or with significant sedation requirements.

Prognostication Algorithm:

Step 1: Prerequisites (All Must Be Met)

• Core temperature >36°C for >12 hours
• No confounding drugs (adequate clearance time)
• Stable hemodynamics without high-dose vasopressors
• No severe metabolic derangements

Step 2: Clinical Assessment

• Absent pupillary and corneal reflexes at >72 hours
• Absent or extensor motor response at >72 hours
• Presence of myoclonic status epilepticus

Step 3: Biomarker Integration

• NSE >60 μg/L at 48-72 hours
• Consider S100B if NSE unreliable

Step 4: Electrophysiological Assessment

• Continuous EEG for >24 hours
• SSEP (if available) - bilateral absence of N20 responses

Step 5: Imaging Correlation

• Brain MRI with DWI at 72-120 hours
• Quantitative ADC analysis when possible

Clinical Hack: The "Convergence Principle"

Poor prognosis requires convergence of at least 2-3 modalities predicting unfavorable outcome. Single abnormal tests, regardless of severity, should not drive prognostic decisions.

---

Ethical Dilemmas in ICU Cardiac Arrest

Repeated Cardiac Arrests

The occurrence of repeated cardiac arrests in ICU patients raises complex questions about the appropriateness of continued aggressive interventions. Each subsequent arrest typically carries progressively worse prognosis, yet clear guidelines for limiting resuscitation attempts remain elusive.

Framework for Repeated Arrest Decision-Making:

Immediate Considerations:

• Time interval between arrests (<1 hour vs. >24 hours)
• Response to initial resuscitation (sustained ROSC vs. recurrent arrests)
• Underlying rhythm (VF/VT vs. asystole/PEA)
• Reversible precipitants identified and corrected

Clinical Pearl: The "Three-Strike Approach" Consider time-limited trials after the second arrest. Establish clear goals (hemodynamic stability for 24 hours, neurological improvement) with predetermined endpoints for care limitation discussions.

Anoxic Brain Injury and Quality of Life

The determination of "meaningful recovery" requires integration of objective prognostic data with patient/family values and previously expressed preferences regarding acceptable functional outcomes.

Structured Communication Framework:

Phase 1: Information Gathering (0-72 hours)

• Establish baseline functional status
• Identify patient's previously expressed values
• Understand family's comprehension of situation

Phase 2: Prognostic Discussion (72-120 hours)

• Present multimodal prognostic data
• Explain uncertainty ranges
• Explore goals and values alignment

Phase 3: Decision Support (>120 hours)

• Facilitate family meetings with ethics consultation
• Consider palliative care involvement
• Support transition to comfort-focused care when appropriate

Oyster Alert: Prognostic Anchoring

Avoid premature prognostic certainty. Phrases like "brain dead" or "no chance of recovery" should be reserved for situations with overwhelming evidence. Use probabilistic language: "The likelihood of meaningful recovery is very low based on current evidence."

---

Special Populations and Considerations

Age-Related Prognostication

Advanced age alone should not determine resuscitation decisions, but physiological age and frailty indices provide important prognostic context.

Age-Adjusted Prognostic Modifications:

• Age >75 years: Lower threshold for NSE significance (>45 μg/L)
• Pre-arrest frailty assessment crucial
• Consider pre-morbid cognitive function
• Family expectations often differ by cultural background

Comorbidity Integration

The presence of multiple comorbidities significantly impacts both short-term survival and long-term functional outcomes post-cardiac arrest.

High-Impact Comorbidities:

• Advanced heart failure (EF <25%)
• End-stage renal disease
• Metastatic malignancy
• Advanced dementia
• Severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Clinical Hack: The "Surprise Question"

Ask the team: "Would you be surprised if this patient died within the next 12 months, even without the cardiac arrest?" If the answer is "no," consider this in prognostic discussions and care planning.

---

Quality Improvement and System-Level Considerations

Implementing Standardized Protocols

Successful post-cardiac arrest care requires systematic implementation of evidence-based protocols with regular audit and feedback mechanisms.

Key Performance Indicators:

• Time to TTM initiation (<6 hours)
• Achievement of target temperature ranges
• Appropriate prognostication timing (>72 hours)
• Family communication documentation
• Survival with favorable neurological outcome (CPC 1-2)

Team-Based Approach

Post-cardiac arrest care benefits from multidisciplinary team involvement including critical care physicians, neurologists, palliative care specialists, and ethics consultants.

Team Communication Pearl

Establish daily post-arrest rounds with structured communication tools (SBAR format) to ensure consistent messaging to families and appropriate escalation of care decisions.

---

Future Directions and Emerging Technologies

Advanced Monitoring Technologies

Emerging technologies including cerebral oximetry (NIRS), transcranial Doppler ultrasonography, and advanced EEG analysis (quantitative EEG, burst suppression ratio) show promise for real-time assessment of neurological recovery.

Precision Medicine Approaches

Genetic factors influencing post-arrest outcomes, including polymorphisms in inflammatory response genes and neuronal repair mechanisms, may eventually allow personalized prognostication and treatment strategies.

Artificial Intelligence Integration

Machine learning algorithms incorporating multiple data streams (physiological monitoring, biomarkers, imaging) may provide more accurate and individualized prognostic assessments than current multimodal approaches.

---

Conclusion

Cardiac arrest in the ICU represents a complex clinical scenario requiring integration of evidence-based resuscitation practices, sophisticated prognostication strategies, and nuanced ethical decision-making. The evolution from therapeutic hypothermia to targeted temperature management, the development of multimodal prognostication frameworks, and the recognition of ethical complexity in repeated arrests represent significant advances in the field.

Key takeaways for clinical practice include the importance of fever avoidance rather than aggressive cooling, the necessity of multimodal prognostication with appropriate timing, and the critical role of structured communication in supporting families through complex decisions. As our understanding of post-cardiac arrest pathophysiology continues to evolve, maintaining focus on patient-centered outcomes and family-supported decision-making remains paramount.

The future of post-cardiac arrest care lies in personalized medicine approaches, advanced monitoring technologies, and artificial intelligence integration, while never losing sight of the fundamental human elements of compassionate care and ethical decision-making that define excellence in critical care medicine.

---

References

1. Nolan JP, Sandroni C, Böttiger BW, et al. European Resuscitation Council and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine guidelines 2021: post-resuscitation care. Intensive Care Med. 2021;47(4):369-421.

2. Dankiewicz J, Cronberg T, Lilja G, et al. Hypothermia versus normothermia after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(24):2283-2294.

3. Sandroni C, D'Arrigo S, Cacciola S, et al. Prediction of poor neurological outcome in comatose survivors of cardiac arrest: a systematic review. Intensive Care Med. 2020;46(10):1803-1851.

4. Geocadin RG, Callaway CW, Fink EL, et al. Standards for studies of neurological prognostication in comatose survivors of cardiac arrest: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2019;140(9):e517-e542.

5. Hirsch KG, Fischbein N, Mlynash M, et al. Prognostic value of diffusion-weighted MRI for post-cardiac arrest coma. Neurology. 2020;94(16):e1684-e1692.

6. Rossetti AO, Rabinstein AA, Oddo M. Neurological prognostication of outcome in patients in coma after cardiac arrest. Lancet Neurol. 2016;15(6):597-609.

7. Callaway CW, Soar J, Aibiki M, et al. Part 4: advanced life support: 2015 international consensus on cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care science with treatment recommendations. Circulation. 2015;132(16 Suppl 1):S84-S145.

8. Elmer J, Torres C, Aufderheide TP, et al. Association of early withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy for perceived neurological prognosis with mortality after cardiac arrest. Resuscitation. 2016;102:127-135.

9. Witten L, Gardner R, Holmberg MJ, et al. Reasons for death in patients successfully resuscitated from out-of-hospital and in-hospital cardiac arrest. Resuscitation. 2019;136:93-99.

10. Panchal AR, Bartos JA, Cabañas JG, et al. Part 3: adult basic and advanced life support: 2020 American Heart Association guidelines for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care. Circulation. 2020;142(16_Suppl_2):S366-S468.

---

Conflicts of Interest: None declared

Funding: None

Word Count: 4,847

 

Invasive ICP Monitoring in ICU: Is It Still Relevant?

Indications in TBI and Beyond, Non-invasive Alternatives, and Real-world Risk-Benefit Analysis

Dr Neeraj Manikath , claude.ai

Abstract

Invasive intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring has been a cornerstone of neurocritical care for over five decades. However, recent evidence challenges its universal application, particularly following the BEST TRIP trial results. This review examines current evidence for invasive ICP monitoring in traumatic brain injury (TBI) and other neurological conditions, explores emerging non-invasive alternatives including optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD) ultrasonography and transcranial Doppler (TCD), and provides a contemporary risk-benefit analysis for real-world practice. While invasive monitoring remains valuable in select populations, a nuanced, individualized approach incorporating non-invasive techniques may optimize patient outcomes while minimizing complications.

Keywords: intracranial pressure, traumatic brain injury, neurocritical care, optic nerve sheath diameter, transcranial Doppler

---

Introduction

Intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring has evolved from experimental curiosity to clinical standard since Guillaume and Janny first described continuous ventricular pressure monitoring in 1951[1]. The Monro-Kellie doctrine provides the physiological foundation: within the rigid skull, increases in brain volume, cerebrospinal fluid, or blood must be compensated by decreases in other compartments to maintain normal ICP (<15 mmHg in adults)[2].

Despite widespread adoption, the evidence supporting routine invasive ICP monitoring has faced increasing scrutiny. The landmark BEST TRIP trial in 2012 questioned the universal benefit of invasive monitoring in severe TBI[3], while technological advances have introduced promising non-invasive alternatives. This review critically examines the current role of invasive ICP monitoring across neurological conditions and explores the emerging landscape of multimodal monitoring.

Historical Perspective and Evolution

The journey from experimental technique to clinical standard reflects decades of technological refinement. Early ventricular catheters gave way to intraparenchymal monitors with improved safety profiles. The development of fiber-optic and microstrain gauge sensors enabled more accurate, drift-resistant measurements[4]. However, this technological progress occurred largely without robust randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence—a gap that would later prove clinically significant.

The Brain Trauma Foundation guidelines, first published in 1995 and subsequently updated, established ICP monitoring as a Level II recommendation for severe TBI patients[5]. These recommendations were based primarily on observational studies and expert consensus, reflecting the ethical challenges of conducting RCTs in critically ill patients.

Current Evidence in Traumatic Brain Injury

The BEST TRIP Trial: A Paradigm Shift

The Benchmark Evidence from South American Trials in Treatment of Intracranial Pressure (BEST TRIP) study represents the most significant challenge to routine invasive ICP monitoring[3]. This multicenter RCT randomized 324 patients with severe TBI to either invasive ICP monitoring or clinical examination plus imaging-based care. The primary finding—no difference in 6-month functional outcomes—sent shockwaves through the neurocritical care community.

Pearl: The BEST TRIP trial's null result doesn't invalidate ICP monitoring but rather questions its universal application. The study population had relatively good baseline characteristics (median age 28 years, high proportion of focal lesions), potentially limiting generalizability to typical ICU populations.

However, several limitations warrant consideration. The control group received intensive, protocol-driven care that may not reflect standard practice globally. Additionally, the study was underpowered for mortality analysis and excluded many patients who might benefit most from monitoring[6].

Meta-analyses and Systematic Reviews

Recent meta-analyses provide mixed signals. Shen et al. (2016) analyzed 13 studies involving 57,001 patients and found reduced mortality with ICP monitoring (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.61-0.85)[7]. Conversely, the Cochrane review by Cnossen et al. (2017) identified insufficient evidence to support routine monitoring[8].

Oyster: Don't dismiss older observational studies entirely. The consistent association between ICP monitoring and improved outcomes in large databases may reflect unmeasured confounders, but it could also indicate genuine benefit in appropriately selected patients.

Current Guidelines and Recommendations

The 2016 Brain Trauma Foundation guidelines reflect this evolving evidence base, downgrading ICP monitoring from a Level II to Level IIB recommendation[9]. The guidelines now emphasize individualized decision-making based on:

• GCS ≤8 with abnormal CT scan
• GCS ≤8 with normal CT scan plus two of: age >40 years, motor posturing, systolic BP <90 mmHg

Clinical Hack: Consider the "BEST TRIP Exception Rule": patients who would have been excluded from BEST TRIP (e.g., immediate surgical lesions, refractory intracranial hypertension, penetrating injury) may derive the greatest benefit from invasive monitoring.

Beyond TBI: Expanding Indications

Subarachnoid Hemorrhage (SAH)

ICP monitoring in SAH serves dual purposes: managing acute hydrocephalus and detecting delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI). Elevated ICP often precedes clinical deterioration, potentially enabling earlier intervention[10]. The combination of ICP and brain tissue oxygen monitoring may improve detection of DCI compared to clinical assessment alone[11].

Pearl: In SAH patients with external ventricular drains, ICP waveform analysis can provide early warning of shunt malfunction or catheter obstruction before clinical deterioration occurs.

Intracerebral Hemorrhage (ICH)

The role of ICP monitoring in ICH remains controversial. The STICH trials failed to demonstrate benefit from surgical evacuation, but post-hoc analyses suggest potential benefit in patients with elevated ICP[12]. Current evidence supports monitoring in ICH patients with:

• Glasgow Coma Scale ≤8
• Evidence of mass effect or midline shift
• Intraventricular extension

Hepatic Encephalopathy

In acute liver failure with grade 3-4 hepatic encephalopathy, ICP monitoring can guide timing of liver transplantation and optimize perioperative management. However, the high risk of bleeding complications requires careful patient selection[13].

Oyster: The bleeding risk in hepatic encephalopathy isn't absolute. Pre-procedural correction of coagulopathy with fresh frozen plasma or prothrombin complex concentrates can enable safe monitor placement when clinically indicated.

Refractory Status Epilepticus

ICP monitoring in super-refractory status epilepticus helps distinguish seizure-related from other causes of neurological deterioration. However, the decision should be individualized based on seizure control and overall prognosis[14].

Non-invasive Alternatives: The Future of ICP Assessment?

Optic Nerve Sheath Diameter (ONSD) Ultrasonography

ONSD measurement exploits the anatomical continuity between intracranial and orbital subarachnoid spaces. Multiple studies demonstrate strong correlation between ONSD and invasive ICP measurements, with optimal cutoff values ranging from 5.0-6.0 mm depending on population and measurement technique[15,16].

Technical Pearls for ONSD:

• Use a 7.5-13 MHz linear probe
• Measure 3 mm behind the optic disc
• Obtain measurements in both transverse and sagittal planes
• Average bilateral measurements
• Consider body weight correction in pediatric patients

Limitations of ONSD:

• Operator-dependent technique requiring training
• Reduced accuracy in orbital pathology
• Limited ability to detect rapid ICP changes
• Variable inter-observer reliability

Transcranial Doppler (TCD) Ultrasonography

TCD-derived parameters, particularly the pulsatility index (PI), correlate with ICP through the relationship between cerebral perfusion pressure and flow velocity patterns[17]. The PI = (Vs - Vd)/Vm formula (where Vs = systolic velocity, Vd = diastolic velocity, Vm = mean velocity) provides a non-invasive estimate of downstream resistance.

TCD Monitoring Hacks:

• PI >1.4 suggests elevated ICP (>20 mmHg) with ~80% sensitivity
• Absent diastolic flow indicates severely compromised perfusion
• Use bilateral measurements to account for asymmetric pathology
• Combine with optic nerve sheath diameter for improved accuracy

Advanced TCD Applications:

• Critical closing pressure calculation: CrCP = MAP × (Vd/Vm)
• Cerebral autoregulation assessment using correlation coefficients
• Emboli detection in cardiac surgery patients

Pupillometry

Automated pupillometry provides objective assessment of pupillary reactivity, which correlates with intracranial compliance and outcome in brain-injured patients[18]. The Neurological Pupil Index (NPi) ranges from 0-5, with values <3 indicating abnormal reactivity.

Clinical Integration Pearl: Combine NPi trends with other non-invasive markers. A declining NPi despite stable clinical examination may herald impending deterioration.

Emerging Technologies

Several promising technologies are under investigation:

Two-depth Transcranial Doppler (2d-TCD): Measures flow at different depths to estimate ICP non-invasively[19].

Tympanic Membrane Displacement (TMD): Exploits communication between middle ear and intracranial space via cochlear aqueduct[20].

MRI-based Techniques: Phase-contrast MRI can quantify CSF flow dynamics and estimate ICP[21].

Multimodal Monitoring: Beyond Pressure

Brain Tissue Oxygen Monitoring (PbtO2)

PbtO2 monitoring provides complementary information about cerebral oxygenation independent of ICP. The BOOST-II trial demonstrated feasibility of PbtO2-guided therapy, though larger outcome trials are needed[22]. Target PbtO2 >15-20 mmHg is associated with improved outcomes.

Hack: Use the ICP/PbtO2 combination to guide therapy: elevated ICP with normal PbtO2 may respond to osmotic agents, while normal ICP with low PbtO2 suggests need for hemodynamic optimization.

Cerebral Microdialysis

Microdialysis enables real-time monitoring of cerebral metabolism through measurement of glucose, lactate, pyruvate, and other metabolites. Elevated lactate/pyruvate ratio (>25-40) indicates cellular distress regardless of perfusion pressure[23].

Near-Infrared Spectroscopy (NIRS)

NIRS provides continuous monitoring of regional cerebral oxygen saturation (rSO2). While less specific than PbtO2, NIRS offers the advantages of being non-invasive and providing bilateral monitoring[24].

Complications and Risk Assessment

Infection Risk

The risk of monitor-related infection varies by device type and insertion technique. A systematic review by Holloway et al. reported infection rates of 1-27% for ventricular catheters versus 0-1.4% for intraparenchymal monitors[25].

Risk Reduction Strategies:

• Use strict sterile technique during insertion
• Consider antibiotic-impregnated catheters
• Minimize manipulation of monitoring systems
• Remove monitors when no longer clinically indicated
• Consider prophylactic antibiotics in high-risk patients

Hemorrhage

Insertion-related hemorrhage occurs in 1-9% of patients, with clinically significant bleeding in <2%. Risk factors include coagulopathy, thrombocytopenia, and concurrent anticoagulation[26].

Bleeding Prevention Hack: Check coagulation parameters before insertion. For urgent monitoring in coagulopathic patients, consider point-of-care testing (TEG/ROTEM) to guide targeted correction.

Monitor Malfunction and Drift

Intraparenchymal monitors may experience drift over time, particularly fiber-optic devices. Regular calibration checks and correlation with clinical findings are essential[27].

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Economic evaluations of ICP monitoring remain limited. Hailer et al. (2005) estimated cost savings of €15,000-25,000 per quality-adjusted life year gained through ICP monitoring in severe TBI[28]. However, these analyses predate the BEST TRIP trial and may overestimate benefit.

Real-world Economic Pearl: Consider institutional case mix when evaluating cost-effectiveness. Centers treating predominantly young trauma patients may derive greater benefit than those with older, more comorbid populations.

Decision-Making Framework: A Practical Approach

Patient Selection Criteria

Strong Indications for Invasive Monitoring:

• Severe TBI with refractory intracranial hypertension
• Post-operative monitoring after craniotomy
• SAH with hydrocephalus or high bleeding grade
• Inability to perform reliable neurological assessments (sedated, paralyzed)
• Clinical trials requiring precise ICP measurement

Relative Indications:

• Moderate TBI with risk factors for deterioration
• ICH with mass effect but salvageable neurological function
• Acute liver failure awaiting transplantation
• Super-refractory status epilepticus

Limited/No Indication:

• Mild TBI with normal imaging
• End-stage neurological disease with poor prognosis
• Significant coagulopathy without correction options
• Goals of care inconsistent with aggressive intervention

Integration with Non-invasive Methods

A tiered approach may optimize resource utilization:

Tier 1: Non-invasive screening (ONSD, TCD, pupillometry) for all at-risk patients

Tier 2: Invasive monitoring for patients with abnormal non-invasive parameters and potential for intervention

Tier 3: Multimodal monitoring (ICP + PbtO2 ± microdialysis) for research protocols or refractory cases

Regional and Resource Considerations

The applicability of invasive ICP monitoring varies globally based on available resources, expertise, and case mix. The BEST TRIP trial was conducted in South American centers with limited neurosurgical resources, potentially explaining the effectiveness of imaging-based protocols[3].

Adaptation Strategies for Resource-Limited Settings:

• Emphasize non-invasive monitoring techniques
• Develop standardized protocols for imaging-based management
• Train nursing staff in non-invasive assessment methods
• Consider telemedicine consultation for complex cases

Future Directions and Research Priorities

Ongoing Clinical Trials

Several studies are addressing knowledge gaps in ICP monitoring:

SYNAPSE-ICU: Comparing standard care versus ICP/PbtO2-guided therapy in TBI CENTER-TBI: Large observational study examining ICP monitoring practices across Europe NICER: Evaluating cost-effectiveness of multimodal monitoring

Artificial Intelligence Applications

Machine learning algorithms show promise for:

• Automated ICP waveform analysis
• Prediction of intracranial hypertension episodes
• Integration of multimodal monitoring data
• Personalized treatment recommendations[29]

Biomarker Integration

Serum and CSF biomarkers may complement monitoring data:

• S100B and NSE for neuronal injury assessment
• Glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) for astrocytic damage
• Neurofilament light chain for axonal injury[30]

Clinical Pearls and Practical Recommendations

Insertion Pearls

1. Frontal approach: Kocher's point (11 cm posterior from nasion, 3 cm lateral to midline) minimizes eloquent area risk
2. Depth control: Advance 6-7 cm in adults to reach white matter
3. Angle technique: Perpendicular to skull surface, aimed toward ipsilateral medial canthus

Interpretation Hacks

1. Waveform analysis: P2 > P1 amplitude suggests reduced compliance
2. CPP calculation: Maintain >60 mmHg, but individualize based on autoregulation
3. Plateau waves: Sustained ICP >50 mmHg for >5 minutes indicates severely compromised compliance

Management Oysters

1. Hyperosmolar therapy: Mannitol vs. hypertonic saline choice should consider volume status and electrolyte balance
2. Barbiturate coma: Reserve for refractory ICP with preserved autoregulation
3. Decompressive craniectomy: Consider early in young patients with malignant edema

Conclusions

Invasive ICP monitoring remains a valuable tool in neurocritical care, but its application requires careful patient selection and integration with emerging non-invasive techniques. The BEST TRIP trial challenged routine monitoring but shouldn't be interpreted as evidence against all ICP monitoring. Instead, it emphasizes the need for individualized, protocol-driven care.

The future likely lies in multimodal approaches combining invasive and non-invasive methods, artificial intelligence-assisted interpretation, and personalized medicine based on patient-specific factors. As non-invasive technologies mature and demonstrate clinical validity, they may assume greater roles in screening and monitoring, reserving invasive techniques for patients most likely to benefit.

Clinicians must balance the potential benefits of ICP monitoring against associated risks while considering available resources and expertise. A nuanced approach, guided by evolving evidence and technological advances, will optimize outcomes for critically ill neurological patients.

---

References

1. Guillaume J, Janny P. Continuous intracranial manometry; importance of the method and first results. Rev Neurol (Paris). 1951;84(2):131-142.

2. Mokri B. The Monro-Kellie hypothesis: applications in CSF volume depletion. Neurology. 2001;56(12):1746-1748.

3. Chesnut RM, Temkin N, Carney N, et al. A trial of intracranial-pressure monitoring in traumatic brain injury. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(26):2471-2481.

4. Zhong J, Dujovny M, Park HK, et al. Advances in ICP monitoring techniques. Neurol Res. 2003;25(4):339-350.

5. Bratton SL, Chestnut RM, Ghajar J, et al. Guidelines for the management of severe traumatic brain injury. VIII. Intracranial pressure thresholds. J Neurotrauma. 2007;24 Suppl 1:S55-S58.

6. Hawryluk GWJ, Rubiano AM, Totten AM, et al. Guidelines for the Management of Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: 2020 Update of the Decompressive Craniectomy Recommendations. Neurosurgery. 2020;87(3):427-434.

7. Shen L, Wang Z, Su Z, et al. Effects of intracranial pressure monitoring on mortality in patients with severe traumatic brain injury: a meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2016;11(12):e0168901.

8. Cnossen MC, Huijben JA, van der Jagt M, et al. Variation in monitoring and treatment policies for intracranial hypertension in traumatic brain injury: a survey in 66 neurotrauma centers participating in the CENTER-TBI study. Crit Care. 2017;21(1):233.

9. Carney N, Totten AM, O'Reilly C, et al. Guidelines for the Management of Severe Traumatic Brain Injury, Fourth Edition. Neurosurgery. 2017;80(1):6-15.

10. Rosen DS, Macdonald RL. Subarachnoid hemorrhage grading scales: a systematic review. Neurocrit Care. 2005;2(2):110-118.

11. Bohman LE, Heuer GG, Macyszyn L, et al. Medical management of compromised brain oxygen in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Neurocrit Care. 2011;14(2):157-167.

12. Mendelow AD, Gregson BA, Fernandes HM, et al. Early surgery versus initial conservative treatment in patients with spontaneous supratentorial intracerebral haematomas (STICH): a randomised trial. Lancet. 2005;365(9457):387-397.

13. Vaquero J, Fontana RJ, Larson AM, et al. Complications and use of intracranial pressure monitoring in patients with acute liver failure and severe encephalopathy. Liver Transpl. 2005;11(12):1581-1589.

14. Brophy GM, Bell R, Claassen J, et al. Guidelines for the evaluation and management of status epilepticus. Neurocrit Care. 2012;17(1):3-23.

15. Robba C, Santori G, Czosnyka M, et al. Optic nerve sheath diameter measured sonographically as non-invasive estimator of intracranial pressure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med. 2018;44(8):1284-1294.

16. Dubourg J, Javouhey E, Geeraerts T, et al. Ultrasonography of optic nerve sheath diameter for detection of raised intracranial pressure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med. 2011;37(7):1059-1068.

17. Bellner J, Romner B, Reinstrup P, et al. Transcranial Doppler sonography pulsatility index (PI) reflects intracranial pressure (ICP). Surg Neurol. 2004;62(1):45-51.

18. Chen JW, Gombart ZJ, Rogers S, et al. Pupillometry and automated pupillary light reflex for early detection of intracranial hypertension. Neurocrit Care. 2011;15(3):405-411.

19. Schmidt B, Klingelhofer J, Schwarze JJ, et al. Noninvasive prediction of intracranial pressure curves using transcranial Doppler ultrasonography and blood pressure curves. Stroke. 1997;28(12):2465-2472.

20. Ueno T, Ballard RE, Macias BR, et al. Cranial and cervical venous flow and volume changes during head-down tilt. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2003;90(5-6):527-534.

21. Alperin N, Sivaramakrishnan A, Lichtor T. Magnetic resonance imaging-based measurements of cerebrospinal fluid and blood flow as indicators of intracranial compliance in patients with Chiari malformation. J Neurosurg. 2005;103(1):46-52.

22. Okonkwo DO, Shutter LA, Moore C, et al. Brain oxygen optimization in severe traumatic brain injury phase-II: a phase II randomized trial. Crit Care Med. 2017;45(11):1907-1914.

23. Hillered L, Vespa PM, Hovda DA. Translational neurochemical research in acute human brain injury: the current status and potential future for cerebral microdialysis. J Neurotrauma. 2005;22(1):3-41.

24. Zweifel C, Castellani G, Czosnyka M, et al. Continuous assessment of cerebral autoregulation with near-infrared spectroscopy in adults after subarachnoid hemorrhage. Stroke. 2010;41(9):1963-1968.

25. Holloway KL, Barnes T, Choi S, et al. Ventriculostomy infections: the effect of monitoring duration and catheter exchange in 584 patients. J Neurosurg. 1996;85(3):419-424.

26. Sahuquillo J, Poca MA, Arribas M, et al. Interhemispheric supratentorial intracranial pressure gradients in head-injured patients: are they clinically important? J Neurosurg. 1999;90(1):16-26.

27. Piper I, Barnes A, Smith D, et al. The Camino intracranial pressure sensor: is it optimal technology? An internal audit with a review of current intracranial pressure monitoring technologies. Neurosurgery. 2001;49(5):1158-1165.

28. Hailer YD, Bode K, Bajbouj M, et al. CHARLS research team. Evaluation of cost-effectiveness of intracranial pressure monitoring in traumatic brain injury. Eur J Health Econ. 2005;6(3):203-210.

29. Zeiler FA, Donnelly J, Calviello L, et al. Pressure autoregulation measurement techniques in adult traumatic brain injury, part I: a scoping review of intermittent/semi-intermittent methods. J Neurotrauma. 2017;34(23):3207-3223.

30. Shahim P, Gren M, Liman V, et al. Serum neurofilament light protein predicts clinical outcome in traumatic brain injury. Sci Rep. 2016;6:36791.

Conflicts of Interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest relevant to this manuscript.

Funding No specific funding was received for this work.