A concerted effort to tackle the global health problem posed by traumatic brain injury (TBI) is long overdue. TBI is a public health challenge of vast, but insufficiently recognised, proportions. Worldwide, more than 50 million people have a TBI each year, and it is estimated that about half the world's population will have one or more TBIs over their lifetime. TBI is the leading cause of mortality in young adults and a major cause of death and disability across all ages in all countries, with a disproportionate burden of disability and death occurring in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). It has been estimated that TBI costs the global economy approximately $US400 billion annually. Deficiencies in prevention, care, and research urgently need to be addressed to reduce the huge burden and societal costs of TBI. This Commission highlights priorities and provides expert recommendations for all stakeholders—policy makers, funders, health-care professionals, researchers, and patient representatives—on clinical and research strategies to reduce this growing public health problem and improve the lives of people with TBI.Additional co-authors: Endre Czeiter, Marek Czosnyka, Ramon Diaz-Arrastia, Jens P Dreier, Ann-Christine Duhaime, Ari Ercole, Thomas A van Essen, Valery L Feigin, Guoyi Gao, Joseph Giacino, Laura E Gonzalez-Lara, Russell L Gruen, Deepak Gupta, Jed A Hartings, Sean Hill, Ji-yao Jiang, Naomi Ketharanathan, Erwin J O Kompanje, Linda Lanyon, Steven Laureys, Fiona Lecky, Harvey Levin, Hester F Lingsma, Marc Maegele, Marek Majdan, Geoffrey Manley, Jill Marsteller, Luciana Mascia, Charles McFadyen, Stefania Mondello, Virginia Newcombe, Aarno Palotie, Paul M Parizel, Wilco Peul, James Piercy, Suzanne Polinder, Louis Puybasset, Todd E Rasmussen, Rolf Rossaint, Peter Smielewski, Jeannette Söderberg, Simon J Stanworth, Murray B Stein, Nicole von Steinbüchel, William Stewart, Ewout W Steyerberg, Nino Stocchetti, Anneliese Synnot, Braden Te Ao, Olli Tenovuo, Alice Theadom, Dick Tibboel, Walter Videtta, Kevin K W Wang, W Huw Williams, Kristine Yaffe for the InTBIR Participants and Investigator

Spreading depolarizations (SD) are waves of abrupt, near-complete breakdown of neuronal transmembrane ion gradients, are the largest possible pathophysiologic disruption of viable cerebral gray matter, and are a crucial mechanism of lesion development. Spreading depolarizations are increasingly recorded during multimodal neuromonitoring in neurocritical care as a causal biomarker providing a diagnostic summary measure of metabolic failure and excitotoxic injury. Focal ischemia causes spreading depolarization within minutes. Further spreading depolarizations arise for hours to days due to energy supply-demand mismatch in viable tissue. Spreading depolarizations exacerbate neuronal injury through prolonged ionic breakdown and spreading depolarization-related hypoperfusion (spreading ischemia). Local duration of the depolarization indicates local tissue energy status and risk of injury. Regional electrocorticographic monitoring affords even remote detection of injury because spreading depolarizations propagate widely from ischemic or metabolically stressed zones; characteristic patterns, including temporal clusters of spreading depolarizations and persistent depression of spontaneous cortical activity, can be recognized and quantified. Here, we describe the experimental basis for interpreting these patterns and illustrate their translation to human disease. We further provide consensus recommendations for electrocorticographic methods to record, classify, and score spreading depolarizations and associated spreading depressions. These methods offer distinct advantages over other neuromonitoring modalities and allow for future refinement through less invasive and more automated approaches.

Objective A relationship between reduced brain tissue oxygenation (PbtO2) and poor outcome following severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) has been reported in observational studies. We designed a Phase II trial to assess whether a neurocritical care management protocol could improve PbtO2 levels in patients with severe TBI and the feasibility of a Phase III efficacy study. Design Randomized prospective clinical trial Setting Ten ICUs in the United States Patients One hundred nineteen severe TBI patients Interventions Patients were randomized to treatment protocol based on intracranial pressure (ICP) plus PbtO2 monitoring versus ICP monitoring alone. PbtO2 data were recorded in the ICP-only group in blinded fashion. Tiered interventions in each arm were specified and impact on ICP and PbtO2 measured. Monitors were removed if values were normal for 48 hours consecutively, or after 5 days. Outcome was measured at 6 months using the Glasgow Outcome Scale–Extended. Measurements and Main Results A management protocol based on PbtO2 and ICP monitoring reduced the proportion of time with brain tissue hypoxia after severe TBI (0.45 in ICP-only group, 0.16 in ICP+PbtO2 group; p<0.0001). ICP control was similar in both groups. Safety and feasibility of the tiered treatment protocol was confirmed. There were no procedure related complications. Treatment of secondary injury after severe TBI based on PbtO2 and ICP values was consistent with reduced mortality and increased proportions of patients with good recovery compared to ICP-only management; however, the study was not powered for clinical efficacy. Conclusions Management of severe TBI informed by multimodal ICP and PbtO2 monitoring reduced brain tissue hypoxia with a trend towards lower mortality and more favorable outcomes than ICP-only treatment. A Phase III randomized trial to assess impact on neurologic outcome of ICP plus PbtO2-directed treatment of severe TBI is warranted.

External ventricular drains (EVDs) are commonly placed to monitor intracranial pressure and manage acute hydrocephalus in patients with a variety of intracranial pathologies. The indications for EVD insertion and their efficacy in the management of these various conditions have been previously addressed in guidelines published by the Brain Trauma Foundation, American Heart Association and combined committees of the American Association of Neurological Surgeons and the Congress of Neurological Surgeons. While it is well recognized that placement of an EVD may be a lifesaving intervention, the benefits can be offset by procedural and catheter-related complications, such as hemorrhage along the catheter tract, catheter malposition, and CSF infection. Despite their widespread use, there are a lack of high-quality data regarding the best methods for placement and management of EVDs to minimize these risks. Existing recommendations are frequently based on observational data from a single center and may be biased to the authors' view. To address the need for a comprehensive set of evidence-based guidelines for EVD management, the Neurocritical Care Society organized a committee of experts in the fields of neurosurgery, neurology, neuroinfectious disease, critical care, pharmacotherapy, and nursing. The Committee generated clinical questions relevant to EVD placement and management. They developed recommendations based on a thorough literature review using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system, with emphasis placed not only on the quality of the evidence, but also on the balance of benefits versus risks, patient values and preferences, and resource considerations.