Paroxysmal Sympathetic Hyperactivity in Neurocritical Children: A Pilot Study.

Background: Paroxysmal sympathetic hyperactivity (PSH) is characterized by the abnormal excessive sympathetic response to acute cerebral insult. There is a paucity of data about this condition in children. This study was planned to analyze the incidence of PSH among children requiring neurocritical care and its association with the outcome. Materials and methods: The study was conducted in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) of a tertiary care hospital over a period of 10 months. Children of age 1 month to 12 years admitted with neurocritical illnesses were included. Children who were declared brain dead after initial resuscitation were excluded from the study. The criterion laid by Moeller et al. was used for the diagnosis for PSH. Results: During the study period, 54 children requiring neurocritical care were included in the study. The incidence of PSH was 5/54 (9.2%). Additionally, 30 (55.5%) children had less than four criteria for PSH and were termed as "incomplete PSH." Children with all four criteria for PSH had a significantly longer duration of mechanical ventilation, PICU stay, and higher PRISM III scores. Children with less than four criteria for PSH also had a longer duration of mechanical ventilation and stay. However, there was no significant difference in mortality. Conclusion: Paroxysmal sympathetic hyperactivity is common in children with neurological illnesses admitted to the PICU and is associated with longer mechanical ventilation and stay in PICU. They also had higher illness severity scores. Timely diagnosis of the condition and appropriate management is required to improve the outcome of these children. How to cite this article: Agrwal S, Pallavi, Jhamb U, Saxena R. Paroxysmal Sympathetic Hyperactivity in Neurocritical Children: A Pilot Study. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(11):1204-1209.

Communicating Neurocritical Illness: The Anatomy of Misunderstanding.

We talk, text, email all day. Do we perceive things correctly? Do we need to improve the way we communicate? It is a truism that providing insufficient information about a patient results in delays and errors in management. How can we best communicate urgent triage or urgent changes in the patient condition? There is no substitute for a face-to-face conversation but what would the receiving end want to know? One starting point for those practicing acute neurology and neurocritical care is a new mnemonic TELL ME (Time course, Essence, Laboratory, Life-sustaining interventions, Management, Expectation), which will assist physicians in standardizing their communication skills before they start a conversation or pick up a phone. These include knowing the time course (new and "out of the blue" or ongoing for some time); extracting the essentials (eliminating all irrelevancies); communicating what tests are known and pending (computerized tomography and laboratory); relaying how much critical support will be needed (secretion burden, intubation, vasopressors); knowing fully which emergency drugs have been administered (e.g., mannitol, antiepileptics, tranexamic acid), when transport is anticipated, and what can be expected in the following hours. Perfect orchestration in communication may be too much to ask, but we neurointensivists strive to convey information accurately and completely. Communication must be taught, learned, and practiced. This article provides guiding principles for a number of scenarios involving communication inside and outside the hospital.

Risk factors and a predictive model for the occurrence of adverse outcomes in patients with new-onset refractory status epilepsy.

Objectives: To determine risk factors for the occurrence of adverse outcomes in patients with new-onset refractory status epilepsy (NORSE) and to construct a concomitant nomogram. Methods: Seventy-six adult patients with NORSE who were admitted to the Department of Neurology, First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University between January 2016 and December 2022 were enrolled for the study. Participants were divided into two-those with good and poor functional outcomes-and their pertinent data was obtained from the hospital medical recording system. Univariate analysis was used to identify potential causes of poor outcomes in both groups and a multivariate logistic regression model was used to identify risk factors for the occurrence of poor outcomes. Using the R programming language RMS package, a nomogram was created to predict the occurrence of poor outcomes. Results: The NORSE risk of adverse outcome nomogram model included four predictors, namely duration of mechanical ventilation (OR = 4.370, 95% CI 1.221-15.640, p = 0.023), antiviral therapy (OR = 0.045, 95% CI 0.005-0.399, p = 0.005), number of anesthetics (OR = 13.428, 95% CI 2.16-83.48, p = 0.005) and neutrophil count/lymphocyte count ratio (NLR) (OR = 5.248, 95% CI 1.509-18.252, p = 0.009). The nomogram had good consistency and discrimination in predicting risk and can thus assist clinical care providers to assess outcomes for NORSE patients. Through ordinary bootstrap analyses, the results of the original set prediction were confirmed as consistent with those of the test set. Conclusion: The nomogram model of risk of adverse outcomes in NORSE adult patients developed in this study can facilitate clinicians to predict the risk of adverse outcomes in NORSE patients and make timely and reasonable interventions for patients at high risk of adverse outcomes.

Association of bilaterally suppressed EEG amplitudes and outcomes in critically ill children.

Background and objectives: Amplitude-integrated EEG (aEEG) is used to assess electrocortical activity in pediatric intensive care if (continuous) full channel EEG is unavailable but evidence regarding the meaning of suppressed aEEG amplitudes in children remains limited. This retrospective cohort study investigated the association of suppressed aEEG amplitudes in critically ill children with death or decline of neurological functioning at hospital discharge. Methods: Two hundred and thirty-five EEGs derived from individual patients <18 years in the pediatric intensive care unit at the University Hospital Essen (Germany) between 04/2014 and 07/2021, were converted into aEEGs and amplitudes analyzed with respect to age-specific percentiles. Crude and adjusted odds ratios (OR) for death, and functional decline at hospital discharge in patients with bilateral suppression of the upper or lower amplitude below the 10th percentile were calculated. Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) were assessed. Results: The median time from neurological insult to EEG recording was 2 days. PICU admission occurred due to neurological reasons in 43% and patients had high overall disease severity. Thirty-three (14%) patients died and 68 (29%) had a functional decline. Amplitude suppression was observed in 48% (upper amplitude) and 57% (lower amplitude), with unilateral suppression less frequent than bilateral suppression. Multivariable regression analyses yielded crude ORs between 4.61 and 14.29 and adjusted ORs between 2.55 and 8.87 for death and functional decline if upper or lower amplitudes were bilaterally suppressed. NPVs for bilaterally non-suppressed amplitudes were above 95% for death and above 83% for pediatric cerebral performance category Scale (PCPC) decline, whereas PPVs ranged between 22 and 32% for death and 49-52% for PCPC decline. Discussion: This study found a high prevalence of suppressed aEEG amplitudes in critically ill children. Bilaterally normal amplitudes predicted good outcomes, whereas bilateral suppression was associated with increased odds for death and functional decline. aEEG assessment may serve as an element for risk stratification of PICU patients if conventional EEG is unavailable with excellent negative predictive abilities but requires additional information to identify patients at risk for poor outcomes.

Translation of patients' advance directives in intensive care units: are we there yet?

OBJECTIVES: This review examined studies regarding the implementation and translation of patients' advance directives (AD) in intensive care units (ICUs), focusing on practical difficulties and obstacles. METHODS: The digital PubMed and Medline databases were screened using predefined keywords to identify relevant prospective and retrospective studies published until 2022. RESULTS: Seventeen studies from the United States, Europe, and South Africa (including 149,413 patients and 1210 healthcare professionals) were identified. The highest prevalence of ADs was described in a prospective study in North America (49%), followed by Central Europe (13%), Asia (4%), Australia and New Zealand (4%), Latin America (3%), and Northern and Southern Europe (2.6%). While four retrospective studies reported limited effects of ADs, four retrospective studies, one survey and one systematic review indicated significant effects on provision of intensive care, higher rates of do-not-resuscitate orders, and care withholding in patients with ADs. Four of these studies showed shorter ICU stays, and lower treatment costs in patients with ADs. One prospective and two retrospective studies reported issues with loss, delayed or no transmission of ADs. One survey revealed that 91% of healthcare workers did not regularly check for ADs. Two retrospective studies and two survey revealed that the implementation of directives is further challenged by issues with their applicability, phrasing, and compliance by the critical care team and family members. CONCLUSIONS: Although ADs may improve intensive- and end-of-life care, insufficient knowledge, lack of awareness, poor communication between healthcare providers and patients or surrogates, lack of standardization of directives, as well as ethical and legal concerns challenge their implementation.

The Performances of SNAQ, GLIM, mNICE, and ASPEN for Identification of Neurocritically Ill Patients at High Risk of Developing Refeeding Syndrome.

We previously found that neurocritically ill patients are prone to refeeding syndrome (RFS), a potentially life-threatening complication. However, there is no unified or validated consensus on the screening tool for RFS so far. We aimed to validate and compare the performance of four screening tools for RFS in neurocritically ill patients. We conducted a single-center, observational, retrospective cohort study among neurocritically ill adult patients who were admitted to the neurocritical care unit (NCU), and who received enteral nutrition for 72 h or longer. They were scored on the Short Nutritional Assessment Questionnaire (SNAQ), the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM), the modified criteria of the Britain's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (mNICE), and ASPEN Consensus Recommendations for Refeeding Syndrome (ASPEN) scales to predict RFS risk via admission data. The performance of each scale in predicting RFS was evaluated. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify the independent risk factors for RFS, and they were added to the above scales to strengthen the identification of RFS. Of the 478 patients included, 84 (17.57%) developed RFS. The sensitivity of the SNAQ and GLIM was only 20.2% (12.6-30.7%), although they had excellent specificities of 84.8% (80.8-88.1%) and 86.0% (82.1-89.2%), respectively; mNICE predicted RFS with a sensitivity of 48.8% (37.8-59.9%) and a specificity of 65.0% (60.0-69.9%); ASPEN had the highest Youden index, with a sensitivity and specificity of 53.6% (42.4-64.4%) and 64.7% (59.8-69.4%), respectively. The Area Under the receiver operating characteristic Curves (AUC) of SNAQ, GLIM, mNICE, and ASPEN to predict RFS were 0.516 (0.470-0.561), 0.533 (0.487-0.579), 0.568 (0.522-0.613), and 0.597 (0.551-0.641), respectively. We identified age, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score as independent risk factors of RFS, and the combination of GCS and age can improve the AUC of ASPEN to 0.664 (0.620-0.706) for predicting RFS. SNAQ, GLIM, mNICE, and ASPEN do not perform well in identifying neurocritically ill patients at high risk of RFS, although ASPEN appears to have relatively a good validity among them. Combining GCS and age with ASPEN slightly improves RFS recognition, but it still leaves a lot of room for improvement.

More is less: Effect of ICF-based early progressive mobilization on severe aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage in the NICU.

Introduction: Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) is a type of stroke that occurs due to a ruptured intracranial aneurysm. Although advanced therapies have been applied to treat aSAH, patients still suffer from functional impairment leading to prolonged stays in the NICU. The effect of early progressive mobilization as an intervention implemented in the ICU setting for critically ill patients remains unclear. Methods: This retrospective study evaluated ICF-based early progressive mobilization's validity, safety, and feasibility in severe aSAH patients. Sixty-eight patients with aSAH with Hunt-Hess grades III-IV were included. They were divided into two groups-progressive mobilization and passive movement. Patients in the progressive mobilization group received progressive ICF-based mobilization intervention, and those in the passive movement group received passive joint movement training. The incidence of pneumonia, duration of mechanical ventilation, length of NICU stay, and incidence of deep vein thrombosis were evaluated for validity. In contrast, the incidence of cerebral vasospasm, abnormally high ICP, and other safety events were assessed for safety. We also described the feasibility of the early mobilization initiation time and the rate of participation at each level for patients in the progressive mobilization group. Results: The results showed that the incidence of pneumonia, duration of mechanical ventilation, and length of NICU stay were significantly lower among patients in the progressive mobilization group than in the passive movement group (P = 0.031, P = 0.004, P = 0.012), but the incidence of deep vein thrombosis did not significantly differ between the two groups. Regarding safety, patients in the progressive mobilization group had a lower incidence of cerebral vasospasm than those in the passive movement group. Considering the effect of an external ventricular drain on cerebral vasospasm (P = 0.015), we further analyzed those patients in the progressive mobilization group who had a lower incidence of cerebral vasospasm in patients who did not have an external ventricular drain (P = 0.011). Although we found 2 events of abnormally increased intracranial pressure in the progressive mobilization group, there was no abnormal decrease in cerebral perfusion pressure in the 2 events. In addition, among other safety events, there was no difference in the occurrence of adverse events between the two groups (P = 0.073), but the number of potential adverse events was higher in the progressive mobilization group (P = 0.001). Regarding feasibility, patients in the progressive mobilization group were commonly initiated 72 h after admission to the NICU, and 47.06% were in the third level of the mobilization protocol. Discussion: We conclude that the ICF-based early progressive mobilization protocol is an effective and feasible intervention tool. For validity, more mobilization interventions might lead to less pneumonia, duration of mechanical ventilation and length of stay for patients with severe aSAH in the NICU, Moreover, it is necessary to pay attention over potential adverse events (especially line problems), although we did not find serious safety events.

Incidence and outcome of refeeding syndrome in neurocritically ill patients.

BACKGROUND & AIM: Neurocritically ill patients are more likely to be comatose and suffer from dysphagia, conditions that inevitably require nutritional support. Inappropriate nutritional support may lead to refeeding syndrome (RFS). This study aimed to explore the incidence and outcome of RFS in neurocritically ill patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study among neurocritically ill patients who received total enteral nutrition for >72 h in a university-affiliated hospital. RFS was defined as the occurrence of new-onset hypophosphatemia (<0.65 mmol/L) within 72 h of the commencement of nutritional support. The primary outcome was 6-month mortality. The secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality, neurocritical care unit (NCU) stay, and hospital length of stay. RESULTS: A total of 328 patients were enrolled, and 56 (17.1%) of them developed RFS within 72 h of nutrition support. Significantly, we found that patients with high malnutrition universal screening tool (MUST) and sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) scores were more likely to develop RFS. The occurrence of RFS was associated with a longer NCU stay, higher 30-day mortality and 6-month mortality, and poorer 6-month functional outcome. Moreover, RFS was identified as an independent risk factor for 6-month mortality. CONCLUSION: RFS is not rare in neurocritically ill patients and is more likely to occur in patients with nutritional risk and more severe conditions. RFS is an independent risk factor for 6-month mortality in neurocritically ill patients.

Development and validation of a new score for predicting functional outcome of neurocritically ill patients: The INCNS score.

AIMS: To develop and validate a novel score for prediction of 3-month functional outcome in neurocritically ill patients. METHODS: The development of the novel score was based on two widely used scores for general critical illnesses (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, APACHE II; Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, SAPS II) and consideration of the characteristics of neurocritical illness. Data from consecutive patients admitted to neurological ICU (N-ICU) between January 2013 and June 2016 were used for the validation. The modified Rankin Scale (mRS) was used to evaluate 3-month functional outcomes. APACHE II scores, SAPS II scores, and our novel scores at 24 hours and 72 hours in N-ICU were obtained. We compared the prognostic performance of our score with APACHE II and SAPS II. RESULTS: We developed a 44-point scoring system named the INCNS score, and it includes 19 items which were categorized into five parts: inflammation (I), nutrition (N), consciousness (C), neurological function (N), and systemic function (S). We validated the INCNS score with a cohort of 941 N-ICU patients. The 72-hours INCNS score achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.828 (95% CI: 0.802-0.854), and the 24-hours INCNS score achieved an AUC of 0.788 (95% CI: 0.759-0.817). The INCNS score exhibited significantly better discriminative and prognostic performance than APACHE II and SAPS II at both 24 hours and 72 hours in N-ICU. CONCLUSION: We developed an INCNS score with superior predictive power for functional outcome of neurocritically ill patients.

Decompressive craniectomy in neurocritical care.

Recently, several randomized controlled trials (RCT) investigating the effectiveness of decompressive craniectomy in the context of neurocritical illnesses have been completed. Thus, a meta-analysis to update the current evidence regarding the effects of decompressive craniectomy is necessary. We searched PUBMED, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Other sources, including internet-based clinical trial registries and grey literature, were also searched. After searching the literature, two investigators independently performed literature screening, assessing the quality of the included trials and extracting the data. The outcome measures included the composite outcome of death or dependence and the risk of death. Ten RCT were included: seven RCT were on malignant middle cerebral artery infarction (MCAI) and three were on severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). Decompressive craniectomy significantly reduced the risk of death for patients suffering malignant MCAI (risk ratio [RR] 0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.36-0.59, P<0.00001) in comparison with no reduction in the risk of death for patients with severe TBI (RR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.48-1.42, P=0.49). However, there was no significant difference in the composite risk of death or dependence at the final follow-up between the decompressive craniectomy group and the conservative treatment group for either malignant MCAI or severe TBI. The present meta-analysis indicates that decompressive craniectomy can significantly reduce the risk of death for patients with malignant MCAI, although no evidence demonstrates that decompressive craniectomy is associated with a reduced risk of death or dependence for TBI patients.