Recording, analysis, and interpretation of spreading depolarizations in neurointensive care: Review and recommendations of the COSBID research group

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 neuro-critical 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

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

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