Improved Transcranial Doppler Waveform Analysis for Intracranial Hypertension Assessment in Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury.

BACKGROUND

Transcranial Doppler (TCD) is a noninvasive bedside tool for cerebral hemodynamic assessments in multiple clinical scenarios. TCD, by means of measuring systolic and diastolic blood velocities, allows the calculation of the pulsatility index (PI), a parameter that is correlated with intracranial pressure (ICP). Nevertheless, the predictive value of the PI for raised ICP appears to be low, as it is subjected to several, often confounding, factors not related to ICP. Recently, the pulsatile apparent resistance (PaR) index was developed as a PI corrected for arterial blood pressure, reducing some of the confounding factors influencing PI. This study compares the predictive value of PaR versus PI for intracranial hypertension (IH) (ICP > 20 mm Hg) in patients with traumatic brain injury.

METHODS

Patients with traumatic brain injury admitted to the neurocritical care unit who required invasive ICP monitoring were included prospectively within 5 days of admission. TCD measurements were performed in both middle cerebral arteries, allowing calculations of the PI and PaR. The optimal cutoff, discriminative power of these parameters for ICP ≥ 20 mm Hg, was assessed by calculating the area under the receiver operator characteristics curve (AUC).

RESULTS

In total, 93 patients were included. A total of 20 (22%) patients experienced IH during the recording sessions. The discriminative power was low for PI (AUC 0.63) but slightly higher for PaR (AUC 0.77). Nonparametric analysis indicated significant difference for PaR when comparing patients with (median 0.169) and without IH (median - 0.052, p = 0.001), whereas PI medians for patients with and without IH were 0.86 and 0.77, respectively (p =  0.041). Regarding subanalyses, the discriminative power of these parameters increased after exclusion of patients who had undergone a neurosurgical procedure. This was especially true for the PaR (AUC 0.89) and PI (AUC 0.72). Among these patients, a PaR cutoff value of - 0.023 had 100% sensitivity and 52.9% specificity.

CONCLUSIONS

In the present study, discriminative power of the PaR for discriminating IH was superior to the PI. The PaR seems to be a reliable noninvasive parameter for detecting IH. Further studies are warranted to define its clinical application, especially in aiding neurosurgical decision making, following up in intensive care units, and defining its ability to indicate responses according to the therapies administered.