Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging · 2022
Optic nerve sheath diameter in intracranial hypertension: Measurement external or internal of the dura mater?
Наблюдательное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Pansell Jakob, Bell Max, Rudberg Peter, Friman Ola, Cooray Charith
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD) is a promising metric to estimate intracranial pressure (ICP). There is no consensus whether ONSD should be measured external (ONSDext) or internal (ONSDint) of the dura mater. Expert opinion favors ONSDint, though without clear evidence to support this. Adjustments of ONSD for eye diameter (ED) and optic nerve diameter (OND) have been suggested to improve precision. We examined the diagnostic accuracy of ONSDext and ONSDint for estimating ICP, unadjusted as well as adjusted for ED and OND.
METHODS: We performed an observational cohort study, measuring ONSDext and ONSDint in patients with invasive ICP monitoring at Karolinska University Hospital in Stockholm, Sweden. We used ONSDext and ONSDint unadjusted as well as adjusted for ED and for OND. We compared the area under the receiver operator characteristics curve (AUROC) for these methods. Thresholds for elevated ICP were set at ≥20 and ≥22 mmHg, respectively.
RESULTS: We included 220 measurements from 100 patients. Median ONSDext and ONSDint were significantly different at 6.7 and 5.2 mm (p = .00). There was no significant difference in AUROC for predicting elevated ICP between ONSDext and ONSDint (.67 vs. .64, p = .31). Adjustment for ED yielded better diagnostic accuracy (AUROC, cutoff, sensitivity, specificity) for ONSDext/ED (.76, .29, .81, .62) and ONSDint/ED (.71, .24, .5, .89).
CONCLUSIONS: ONSDext and ONSDint differ significantly and are not interchangeable. However, there were no significant differences in diagnostic accuracy between ONSDext and ONSDint. Adjustment for ED may improve diagnostic accuracy of ONSD.
METHODS: We performed an observational cohort study, measuring ONSDext and ONSDint in patients with invasive ICP monitoring at Karolinska University Hospital in Stockholm, Sweden. We used ONSDext and ONSDint unadjusted as well as adjusted for ED and for OND. We compared the area under the receiver operator characteristics curve (AUROC) for these methods. Thresholds for elevated ICP were set at ≥20 and ≥22 mmHg, respectively.
RESULTS: We included 220 measurements from 100 patients. Median ONSDext and ONSDint were significantly different at 6.7 and 5.2 mm (p = .00). There was no significant difference in AUROC for predicting elevated ICP between ONSDext and ONSDint (.67 vs. .64, p = .31). Adjustment for ED yielded better diagnostic accuracy (AUROC, cutoff, sensitivity, specificity) for ONSDext/ED (.76, .29, .81, .62) and ONSDint/ED (.71, .24, .5, .89).
CONCLUSIONS: ONSDext and ONSDint differ significantly and are not interchangeable. However, there were no significant differences in diagnostic accuracy between ONSDext and ONSDint. Adjustment for ED may improve diagnostic accuracy of ONSD.