BACKGROUND: The driving pressure gradient for cerebral perfusion is the difference between mean arterial pressure (MAP) and critical closing pressure (CCP = zero flow pressure). Therefore, determination of the difference between MAP and CCP should provide an appropriate monitoring of the effective cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP(eff)). Based on this concept, the authors compared conventional measurements of cerebral perfusion pressure by MAP and intracranial pressure (CPP(ICP)) with CPP(eff). METHODS: Simultaneous synchronized recordings of pressure waveforms of the radial artery and blood flow velocities of the middle cerebral artery were performed in 70 head trauma patients. CCP was calculated from pressure-flow velocity plots by linear extrapolation to zero flow. RESULTS: Intracranial pressure measured by intraventricular probes and CCP ranged from 3 to 71 and 4 to 70 mmHg, respectively. Linear correlation between ICP and CCP was r = 0.91. CPP(ICP) was 77 +/- 20 mmHg and did not differ from CPP(eff); linear correlation was r = 0.92. However, limits of agreement were only +/- 16.2 mmHg. Therefore, in 51.4% of the patients, CPP(ICP) overestimated CPP(eff) by 19.8 mmHg at most. CONCLUSION: Assuming that CPP(eff) (MAP - CCP) takes into account more determinants of cerebral downstream pressure, in individual cases, the actual gold standard of CPP determination (MAP - ICP) might overestimate the CPP(eff) of therapeutic significance.
BACKGROUND: The driving pressure gradient for cerebral perfusion is the difference between mean arterial pressure (MAP) and critical closing pressure (CCP = zero flow pressure). Therefore, determination of the difference between MAP and CCP should provide an appropriate monitoring of the effective cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP(eff)). Based on this concept, the authors compared conventional measurements of cerebral perfusion pressure by MAP and intracranial pressure (CPP(ICP)) with CPP(eff). METHODS: Simultaneous synchronized recordings of pressure waveforms of the radial artery and blood flow velocities of the middle cerebral artery were performed in 70 head traumapatients. CCP was calculated from pressure-flow velocity plots by linear extrapolation to zero flow. RESULTS: Intracranial pressure measured by intraventricular probes and CCP ranged from 3 to 71 and 4 to 70 mmHg, respectively. Linear correlation between ICP and CCP was r = 0.91. CPP(ICP) was 77 +/- 20 mmHg and did not differ from CPP(eff); linear correlation was r = 0.92. However, limits of agreement were only +/- 16.2 mmHg. Therefore, in 51.4% of the patients, CPP(ICP) overestimated CPP(eff) by 19.8 mmHg at most. CONCLUSION: Assuming that CPP(eff) (MAP - CCP) takes into account more determinants of cerebral downstream pressure, in individual cases, the actual gold standard of CPP determination (MAP - ICP) might overestimate the CPP(eff) of therapeutic significance.
Authors: Christof Thees; Kai-Michael Scheufler; Joachim Nadstawek; Josef Zentner; Ariane Lehnert; Andreas Hoeft Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2003-01-23 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Caren Marzban; Paul R Illian; David Morison; Anne Moore; Michel Kliot; Marek Czosnyka; Pierre D Mourad Journal: J Neurosurg Anesthesiol Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 3.956
Authors: C Puppo; J Camacho; G V Varsos; B Yelicich; H Gómez; L Moraes; A Biestro; M Czosnyka Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 3.210
Authors: Alec Lafontant; Elizabeth Mahanna Gabrielli; Karla Bergonzi; Rodrigo M Forti; Tiffany S Ko; Ronak M Shah; Jeffrey S Arkles; Daniel J Licht; Arjun G Yodh; W Andrew Kofke; Brian R White; Wesley B Baker Journal: Neurophotonics Date: 2022-08-25 Impact factor: 4.212
Authors: Christof Thees; Markus Kaiser; Martin Scholz; Alexander Semmler; Michael T Heneka; Georg Baumgarten; Andreas Hoeft; Christian Putensen Journal: Crit Care Date: 2007 Impact factor: 9.097