Dilation velocity is associated with Glasgow Coma Scale scores in patients with brain injury.

Background: Pupillary light reflex (PLR) is informative about patients with neurological injury. Automated pupillometry provides discrete variables such as dilation velocity (DV). The objective of this study is to determine association between DV and Glasgow Coma Score (GCS), for patients with acquired brain injury.Methods: There were 2,208 patients with acquired brain injury, pupillometer readings, and daily GCS values available in our registry. GCS was trichotomized as severe (GCS ≤ 8), moderate (GCS = 9-12), or mild injury (GCS = 13-15). Generalized Linear Mixed Model regression was used to identify correlation between DV and GCS.Results: Patient mean age was 58.9 years, and 49.11% were female. There were 42,229 observations of GCS and DV. Mean admission GCS was 11.7. In the left eye, there was a statistically significant negative association for mean DV in patients with mild (DV = 0.85 mm/s), moderate (DV = 0.71 mm/s), and severe (DV = 0.48 mm/s) injury (p < .0001). Similar results were noted in the right eye with mild (DV = 0.87 mm/s), moderate (DV = 0.72 mm/s), and severe (DV = 0.50 mm/s) injury (p < .0001).Conclusion: Higher GCS is associated with faster DV. PLR may provide a biomarker of injury when a neurological exam is limited.Trial Registration: NCT02804438 (June 17, 2016).ABBREVIATIONS: GCS: Glasgow Coma Scale; PLR: Pupillary Light Reflex; DV: Dilation velocity; ICP: Intracranial pressure; NPi: Neurological pupil index; mRS: Modified Rankin Score; PCT: Percent change in size (pre and post constriction); Lat: Latency; CV: Constriction velocity; GLMM: Generalized Linear Mixed Model.

Postoperative Pain Management Is Influenced by Previous Cannabis Use in Neurosurgical Patients.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Cannabis use for medical and recreational purposes is growing. Cannabis may have drug-drug interactions for managing pain, anxiety, and seizures. The research regarding cannabis use in patients with craniotomy surgeries is sparse and often conducted in states where cannabis use is legal. This study compared 24-hour postoperative craniotomy pain levels in patients who reported cannabis use in a state where cannabis is not yet legal. METHODS: This is an observational prospective, nonrandomized, pilot study of postoperative craniotomy patients. Patients were consented and given a one-time self-report questionnaire regarding postoperative pain, pain management method, type of pain medication used at home (including cannabis), route of administration, and frequency of use. Subjects scored pain on both the numeric rating scale and the visual analog scale. Demographic data were collected from the electronic medical record. RESULTS: Forty-five patients with a mean age of 57 years, 62% female, participated in this study. There were 33% who reported previous cannabis use. One-way analysis of variance showed a significant difference in the mean postoperative pain scores for the cannabis users (4.58) and nonusers (3.89; P = .0056). There was no significant difference between age (P = .1894) and adequacy of pain control (P = .6584) between users and nonusers. CONCLUSION: In this pilot study, a one-time survey in critical care on the sensitive topic of cannabis use is feasible and seems to generate honest responses. One-third of patients reported home use of cannabis in a state where cannabis is illegal.