No abstract

T raumaTic brain injury (TBI) is a common cause of death and disability worldwide. 17 Despite some claims to the contrary, no clear decrease in severe TBI-related mortality or improvement in overall outcome has been observed over the past 2 decades. 24 Recently, many studies have shown that the presence and frequency of high intracranial pressure (ICP) are predictive of the outcome of severe TBI. 18,23 Thus, ICP monitoring has been widely used in the management of severe TBI. Indeed, the Brain Trauma Foundation (BTF) guideabbreviatioNs BTF = Brain Trauma Foundation; GCS = Glasgow Coma Scale; ICP = intracranial pressure; ICU = intensive care unit; MD = mean difference; STROBE = Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology; TBI = traumatic brain injury. submitted January 9, 2014. accepted October 22, 2014. iNclude wheN citiNg Published online December 5, 2014; DOI: 10.3171/2014.10.JNS1460. disclosure The authors report no conflict of interest concerning the materials or methods used in this study or the findings specified in this paper. This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC Grants 30371454, 81271375, and 81171133), the Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality Project (10JC1402300), and Shanghai Nature Science Foundation (08411952000). * Drs. Qiang Yuan, Xing Wu, and Yirui Sun contributed equally to this work. obJect Some studies have demonstrated that intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring reduces the mortality of traumatic brain injury (TBI). But other studies have shown that ICP monitoring is associated with increased mortality. Thus, the authors performed a meta-analysis of studies comparing ICP monitoring with no ICP monitoring in patients who have suffered a TBI to determine if differences exist between these strategies with respect to mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), and hospital LOS. methods The authors systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Central) from their inception to October 2013 for relevant studies. Randomized clinical trials and prospective cohort, retrospective observational cohort, and case-control studies that compared ICP monitoring with no ICP monitoring for the treatment of TBI were included in the analysis. Studies included had to report at least one point of mortality in an ICP monitoring group and a no-ICP monitoring group. Data were extracted for study characteristics, patient demographics, baseline characteristics, treatment details, and study outcomes. results A total of 14 studies including 24,792 patients were analyzed. The meta-analysis provides no evidence that ICP monitoring decreased the risk of death (pooled OR 0.93 [95% CI 0.77-1.11], p = 0.40). However, 7 of the studies including 12,944 patients were published after 2012 (January 2012 to October 2013), and they revealed that ICP monitoring was significantly associated with a greater decrease in mortality than no ICP monitoring (pooled OR 0.56 [95% CI 0.41-0.78...

The association between coagulopathy and either isolated traumatic brain injury (TBI) or progressive hemorrhagic injury (PHI) remains controversial. The aims of this study were to evaluate whether isolated TBI induces pronounced coagulopathy, in comparison with non-TBI or TBI in conjunction with other injuries (TBI + other injuries), and to examine whether there is any evidence of a relationship between coagulopathy and PHI in patients who have experienced TBI. The MEDLINE(®) and Embase databases, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Central), were trawled for relevant studies. Searches covered the period from the inception of each of the databases to June 2015, and were conducted using appropriate combinations of terms and key words based on medical subject headings (MeSH). Studies were included if they compared isolated TBI with a similar severity of injury to other body regions, or compared PHI with non-PHI, with regard to coagulation tests and the prevalence of coagulopathy. We extracted the means and standard deviations (SD) of coagulation test levels, as well as their ranges or the percentage of abnormal coagulation tests, in both cases and controls. A total of 19 studies were included in our systematic review and meta-analysis. Only the mean fibrinogen (FIB) in isolated TBI was found to be significantly higher than in TBI + other injuries (pooled mean difference [MD] 32.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.92-59.25; p = 0.02); in contrast, it was also significantly higher than in non-TBI (pooled MD 15.44; 95% CI 0.28-30.59; p = 0.05). We identified 15 studies that compared coagulopathy between a PHI group and a non-PHI group. The PHI group had a lower platelet count (PLT) value (pooled MD -19.21; 95% CI: -26.99 to -11.44, p < 0.001) and a higher international normalized ratio (INR) value (pooled MD 0.07; 95% CI: 0.02-0.13, p = 0.006) than the non-PHI group, but no differences were observed in the mean activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT) and prothrombin time (PT) between the PHI and non-PHI patients. In addition, PHI was significantly associated with a higher percentage of INR >1.2 (pooled OR 3.49 [95% CI 1.97-6.20], p < 0.001), PLT <100 × 109/L (pooled OR 4.74 [95% CI 2.44-9.20], p < 0.001), and coagulopathy (pooled OR 2.52; 95% CI 1.88- 3.38; p < 0.001), compared with non-PHI. The current clinical evidence does not indicate that the prevalence of coagulopathy in TBI is significantly higher than in injuries of similar severity to other areas of the body, or in multiple injuries with TBI. With respect to the association between coagulopathy and PHI, the occurrence of coagulopathy, INR, and PLT was significantly associated with PHI, but APTT and PT were not found to be associated with PHI. In the future, high quality research will be required to further characterize the effects of coagulopathy on TBI and subsequent PHI.