Guidelines for Neuroprognostication in Comatose Adult Survivors of Cardiac Arrest.

BACKGROUND: Among cardiac arrest survivors, about half remain comatose 72 h following return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). Prognostication of poor neurological outcome in this population may result in withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy and death. The objective of this article is to provide recommendations on the reliability of select clinical predictors that serve as the basis of neuroprognostication and provide guidance to clinicians counseling surrogates of comatose cardiac arrest survivors. METHODS: A narrative systematic review was completed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Candidate predictors, which included clinical variables and prediction models, were selected based on clinical relevance and the presence of an appropriate body of evidence. The Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, Timing, Setting (PICOTS) question was framed as follows: "When counseling surrogates of comatose adult survivors of cardiac arrest, should [predictor, with time of assessment if appropriate] be considered a reliable predictor of poor functional outcome assessed at 3 months or later?" Additional full-text screening criteria were used to exclude small and lower-quality studies. Following construction of the evidence profile and summary of findings, recommendations were based on four GRADE criteria: quality of evidence, balance of desirable and undesirable consequences, values and preferences, and resource use. In addition, good practice recommendations addressed essential principles of neuroprognostication that could not be framed in PICOTS format. RESULTS: Eleven candidate clinical variables and three prediction models were selected based on clinical relevance and the presence of an appropriate body of literature. A total of 72 articles met our eligibility criteria to guide recommendations. Good practice recommendations include waiting 72 h following ROSC/rewarming prior to neuroprognostication, avoiding sedation or other confounders, the use of multimodal assessment, and an extended period of observation for awakening in patients with an indeterminate prognosis, if consistent with goals of care. The bilateral absence of pupillary light response > 72 h from ROSC and the bilateral absence of N20 response on somatosensory evoked potential testing were identified as reliable predictors. Computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging of the brain > 48 h from ROSC and electroencephalography > 72 h from ROSC were identified as moderately reliable predictors. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines provide recommendations on the reliability of predictors of poor outcome in the context of counseling surrogates of comatose survivors of cardiac arrest and suggest broad principles of neuroprognostication. Few predictors were considered reliable or moderately reliable based on the available body of evidence.

Guidelines for Neuroprognostication in Adults with Guillain-Barré Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) often carries a favorable prognosis. Of adult patients with GBS, 10-30% require mechanical ventilation during the acute phase of the disease. After the acute phase, the focus shifts to restoration of motor strength, ambulation, and neurological function, with variable speed and degree of recovery. The objective of these guidelines is to provide recommendations on the reliability of select clinical predictors that serve as the basis of neuroprognostication and provide guidance to clinicians counseling adult patients with GBS and/or their surrogates. METHODS: A narrative systematic review was completed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Candidate predictors, including clinical variables and prediction models, were selected based on clinical relevance and presence of appropriate body of evidence. The Population/Intervention/Comparator/Outcome/Time frame/Setting (PICOTS) question was framed as follows: "When counseling patients or surrogates of critically ill patients with Guillain-Barré syndrome, should [predictor, with time of assessment if appropriate] be considered a reliable predictor of [outcome, with time frame of assessment]?" Additional full-text screening criteria were used to exclude small and lower quality studies. Following construction of an evidence profile and summary of findings, recommendations were based on four GRADE criteria: quality of evidence, balance of desirable and undesirable consequences, values and preferences, and resource use. In addition, good practice recommendations addressed essential principles of neuroprognostication that could not be framed in PICOTS format. RESULTS: Eight candidate clinical variables and six prediction models were selected. A total of 45 articles met our eligibility criteria to guide recommendations. We recommend bulbar weakness (the degree of motor weakness at disease nadir) and the Erasmus GBS Respiratory Insufficiency Score as moderately reliable for prediction of the need for mechanical ventilation. The Erasmus GBS Outcome Score (EGOS) and modified EGOS were identified as moderately reliable predictors of independent ambulation at 3 months and beyond. Good practice recommendations include consideration of both acute and recovery phases of the disease during prognostication, discussion of the possible need for mechanical ventilation and enteral nutrition during counseling, and consideration of the complete clinical condition as opposed to a single variable during prognostication. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines provide recommendations on the reliability of predictors of the need for mechanical ventilation, poor functional outcome, and independent ambulation following GBS in the context of counseling patients and/or surrogates and suggest broad principles of neuroprognostication. Few predictors were considered moderately reliable based on the available body of evidence, and higher quality data are needed.

Clinical Performance Measures for Neurocritical Care: A Statement for Healthcare Professionals from the Neurocritical Care Society.

BACKGROUND: Performance measures are tools to measure the quality of clinical care. To date, there is no organized set of performance measures for neurocritical care. METHODS: The Neurocritical Care Society convened a multidisciplinary writing committee to develop performance measures relevant to neurocritical care delivery in the inpatient setting. A formal methodology was used that included systematic review of the medical literature for 13 major neurocritical care conditions, extraction of high-level recommendations from clinical practice guidelines, and development of a measurement specification form. RESULTS: A total of 50,257 citations were reviewed of which 150 contained strong recommendations deemed suitable for consideration as neurocritical care performance measures. Twenty-one measures were developed across nine different conditions and two neurocritical care processes of care. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first organized Neurocritical Care Performance Measure Set. Next steps should focus on field testing to refine measure criteria and assess implementation.

The Insertion and Management of External Ventricular Drains: An Evidence-Based Consensus Statement : A Statement for Healthcare Professionals from the Neurocritical Care Society.

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.

External Ventricular Drain Management Practices in Thailand: Results of the EPRACT Study.

OBJECTIVE: We explored the external ventricular drain (EVD) practices in Thailand. METHODS: We performed a survey-based study to describe EVD insertion, maintenance, quality improvement (QI) practices, and incidence of EVD infection. RESULTS: The study included 58 of 101 hospitals contacted (57.4% response rate), with ≥600 beds (44.8%) and dedicated neurocritical care units (53%). The reasons for EVD placement included aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage, traumatic brain injury, and ventriculoperitoneal shunt malfunction or infection; 75.9% of the hospitals cared for ≤100 EVDs annually. In Thailand, nonantimicrobial EVD catheters (98.3%) were used most often. Most hospitals (56.9%) did not routinely sample the cerebrospinal fluid. Prophylactic daily antibiotic use was prevalent (62.1%). Most hospitals (77.6%) did not measure the intracranial pressure during intrahospital transport. EVD infection was a commonly (69%) tracked QI measure; however, up to one third of the hospitals did not track any EVD QI measure. Most hospitals (94.8%) had no written EVD insertion and maintenance protocols. Most hospitals (79.3%) reported an EVD infection rate of ≤5% in the previous year. The low EVD infection rate, high cost, and/or the lack of equipment could account for the low usage of antimicrobial catheters and intracranial pressure monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study have identified QI opportunities in EVD management in Thailand. The development of an EVD-related QI process, reliable tracking of EVD infection rates, adaptation of U.S. guidelines to create standardized EVD protocols, and examination of the association between EVD practices and clinical outcomes in low-to middle-income countries are urgently needed.

The role of pre-reduction MRI in the management of complex cervical spine fracture-dislocations: an ongoing controversy?

BACKGROUND: Cervical spine fracture-dislocations in neurologically intact patients represent a surgical challenge due to the risk of inflicting iatrogenic spinal cord compression by closed reduction maneuvers. The use of MRI for early advanced imaging in these injuries remains controversially debated. CASE PRESENTATION: A 54-year old man sustained a fall over the handlebars of his racing bicycle. The helmeted patient sustained a fall on his head which resulted in a hyperflexion injury of the neck. He was neurologically intact on presentation. Initial CT imaging revealed a complex multisegmental cervical spine injury with a left-sided C6/C7 perched facet, a right sided C7/T1 fracture-dislocation, and a right-sided C6 and C7 traumatic laminotomy. The initial management consisted of temporary external Halo fixator application without closed reduction maneuver, to mitigate the risk of a delayed spinal cord injury. Subsequent advanced imaging by MRI revealed an acute traumatic C7/T1 disc herniation, with the intervertebral disc completely extruded into the spinal canal. Definitive surgical management was then accomplished by employing a three-stage anterior-posterior-anterior spinal decompression, realignment, fixation and fusion C4-T2 in one operative session. The patient recovered well and retained full neurological function. He resumed bicycle street racing within 10 months of the injury following successful spinal reconstruction. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic evaluation of cervical fracture-dislocations should include advanced imaging by MRI in order to fully understand the injury pattern prior to proceeding with spinal reduction maneuvers which may impose the imminent threat of a devastating iatrogenic injury to the spinal cord. The presented staged management by initial Halo fixation without attempts for spinal reduction, followed by a surgical decompression and multilevel fusion, appears to represent a feasible and safe strategy for patients at risk of a delayed neurological injury.