Variation in general supportive and preventive intensive care management of traumatic brain injury: a survey in 66 neurotrauma centers participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study

Abstract Background General supportive and preventive measures in the intensive care management of traumatic brain injury (TBI) aim to prevent or limit secondary brain injury and optimize recovery. The aim of this survey was to assess and quantify variation in perceptions on intensive care unit (ICU) management of patients with TBI in European neurotrauma centers. Methods We performed a survey as part of the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. We analyzed 23 questions focused on: 1) circulatory and respiratory management; 2) fever control; 3) use of corticosteroids; 4) nutrition and glucose management; and 5) seizure prophylaxis and treatment. Results The survey was completed predominantly by intensivists (n = 33, 50%) and neurosurgeons (n = 23, 35%) from 66 centers (97% response rate). The most common cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) target was > 60 mmHg (n = 39, 60%) and/or an individualized target (n = 25, 38%). To support CPP, crystalloid fluid loading (n = 60, 91%) was generally preferred over albumin (n = 15, 23%), and vasopressors (n = 63, 96%) over inotropes (n = 29, 44%). The most commonly reported target of partial pressure of carbon dioxide in arterial blood (PaCO2) was 36–40 mmHg (4.8–5.3 kPa) in case of controlled intracranial pressure (ICP) < 20 mmHg (n = 45, 69%) and PaCO2 target of 30–35 mmHg (4–4.7 kPa) in case of raised ICP (n = 40, 62%). Almost all respondents indicated to generally treat fever (n = 65, 98%) with paracetamol (n = 61, 92%) and/or external cooling (n = 49, 74%). Conventional glucose management (n = 43, 66%) was preferred over tight glycemic control (n = 18, 28%). More than half of the respondents indicated to aim for full caloric replacement within 7 days (n = 43, 66%) using enteral nutrition (n = 60, 92%). Indications for and duration of seizure prophylaxis varied, and levetiracetam was mostly reported as the agent of choice for both seizure prophylaxis (n = 32, 49%) and treatment (n = 40, 61%). Conclusions Practice preferences vary substantially regarding general supportive and preventive measures in TBI patients at ICUs of European neurotrauma centers. These results provide an opportunity for future comparative effectiveness research, since a more evidence-based uniformity in good practices in general ICU management could have a major impact on TBI outcome

Efficacy and Safety of Gadopiclenol for Contrast-Enhanced MRI of the Central Nervous System: The PICTURE Randomized Clinical Trial

Objectives: Developing new high relaxivity gadolinium-based contrast agents (GBCAs) for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) allowing dose reduction while maintaining similar diagnostic efficacy is needed, especially in the context of gadolinium retention in tissues. This study aimed to demonstrate that contrast-enhanced MRI of the central nervous system (CNS) with gadopiclenol at 0.05 mmol/kg is not inferior to gadobutrol at 0.1 mmol/kg, and superior to unenhanced MRI. Materials and methods: PICTURE is an international, randomized, double-blinded, controlled, cross-over, phase III study, conducted between June 2019 and September 2020. Adult patients with CNS lesions were randomized to undergo 2 MRIs (interval, 2-14 days) with gadopiclenol (0.05 mmol/kg) then gadobutrol (0.1 mmol/kg) or vice versa. The primary criterion was lesion visualization based on 3 parameters (border delineation, internal morphology, and contrast enhancement), assessed by 3 off-site blinded readers. Key secondary outcomes included lesion-to-background ratio, enhancement percentage, contrast-to-noise ratio, overall diagnostic preference, and adverse events. Results: Of the 256 randomized patients, 250 received at least 1 GBCA administration (mean [SD] age, 57.2 [13.8] years; 53.6% women). The statistical noninferiority of gadopiclenol (0.05 mmol/kg) to gadobutrol (0.1 mmol/kg) was achieved for all parameters and all readers (n = 236, lower limit 95% confidence interval of the difference ≥-0.06, above the noninferiority margin [-0.35], P < 0.0001), as well as its statistical superiority over unenhanced images (n = 239, lower limit 95% confidence interval of the difference ≥1.29, P < 0.0001).Enhancement percentage and lesion-to-background ratio were higher with gadopiclenol for all readers ( P < 0.0001), and contrast-to-noise ratio was higher for 2 readers ( P = 0.02 and P < 0.0001). Three blinded readers preferred images with gadopiclenol for 44.8%, 54.4%, and 57.3% of evaluations, reported no preference for 40.7%, 21.6%, and 23.2%, and preferred images with gadobutrol for 14.5%, 24.1%, and 19.5% ( P < 0.001).Adverse events reported after MRI were similar for gadopiclenol (14.6% of patients) and gadobutrol (17.6%). Adverse events considered related to gadopiclenol (4.9%) and gadobutrol (6.9%) were mainly injection site reactions, and none was serious. Conclusions: Gadopiclenol at 0.05 mmol/kg is not inferior to gadobutrol at 0.1 mmol/kg for MRI of the CNS, confirming that gadopiclenol can be used at half the gadolinium dose used for other GBCAs to achieve similar clinical efficacy

Variation in neurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury: a survey in 68 centers participating in the CENTER-TBI study (vol 161, pg 453, 2019)

The collaborator names are inverted.status: publishe

Variation in neurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury: a survey in 68 centers participating in the CENTER-TBI study

BACKGROUND: Neurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury (TBI) is challenging, with only low-quality evidence. We aimed to explore differences in neurosurgical strategies for TBI across Europe. METHODS: A survey was sent to 68 centers participating in the Collaborative European Neurotrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. The questionnaire contained 21 questions, including the decision when to operate (or not) on traumatic acute subdural hematoma (ASDH) and intracerebral hematoma (ICH), and when to perform a decompressive craniectomy (DC) in raised intracranial pressure (ICP). RESULTS: The survey was completed by 68 centers (100%). On average, 10 neurosurgeons work in each trauma center. In all centers, a neurosurgeon was available within 30 min. Forty percent of responders reported a thickness or volume threshold for evacuation of an ASDH. Most responders (78%) decide on a primary DC in evacuating an ASDH during the operation, when swelling is present. For ICH, 3% would perform an evacuation directly to prevent secondary deterioration and 66% only in case of clinical deterioration. Most respondents (91%) reported to consider a DC for refractory high ICP. The reported cut-off ICP for DC in refractory high ICP, however, differed: 60% uses 25 mmHg, 18% 30 mmHg, and 17% 20 mmHg. Treatment strategies varied substantially between regions, specifically for the threshold for ASDH surgery and DC for refractory raised ICP. Also within center variation was present: 31% reported variation within the hospital for inserting an ICP monitor and 43% for evacuating mass lesions. CONCLUSION: Despite a homogeneous organization, considerable practice variation exists of neurosurgical strategies for TBI in Europe. These results provide an incentive for comparative effectiveness research to determine elements of effective neurosurgical care.status: publishe

Variation in neurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury: a survey in 68 centers participating in the CENTER-TBI study

BackgroundNeurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury (TBI) is challenging, with only low-quality evidence. We aimed to explore differences in neurosurgical strategies for TBI across Europe.MethodsA survey was sent to 68 centers participating in the Collaborative European Neurotrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. The questionnaire contained 21 questions, including the decision when to operate (or not) on traumatic acute subdural hematoma (ASDH) and intracerebral hematoma (ICH), and when to perform a decompressive craniectomy (DC) in raised intracranial pressure (ICP).ResultsThe survey was completed by 68 centers (100%). On average, 10 neurosurgeons work in each trauma center. In all centers, a neurosurgeon was available within 30min. Forty percent of responders reported a thickness or volume threshold for evacuation of an ASDH. Most responders (78%) decide on a primary DC in evacuating an ASDH during the operation, when swelling is present. For ICH, 3% would perform an evacuation directly to prevent secondary deterioration and 66% only in case of clinical deterioration. Most respondents (91%) reported to consider a DC for refractory high ICP. The reported cut-off ICP for DC in refractory high ICP, however, differed: 60% uses 25mmHg, 18% 30mmHg, and 17% 20mmHg. Treatment strategies varied substantially between regions, specifically for the threshold for ASDH surgery and DC for refractory raised ICP. Also within center variation was present: 31% reported variation within the hospital for inserting an ICP monitor and 43% for evacuating mass lesions.ConclusionDespite a homogeneous organization, considerable practice variation exists of neurosurgical strategies for TBI in Europe. These results provide an incentive for comparative effectiveness research to determine elements of effective neurosurgical care