| Literature DB >> 24667767 |
Martin Glimåker1, Bibi Johansson2, Halla Halldorsdottir3, Michael Wanecek3, Adrian Elmi-Terander4, Per Hamid Ghatan5, Lars Lindquist2, Bo Michael Bellander4.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of early intracranial pressure (ICP)-targeted treatment, compared to standard intensive care, in adults with community acquired acute bacterial meningitis (ABM) and severely impaired consciousness.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24667767 PMCID: PMC3965390 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0091976
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1The algorithm for inclusion and exclusion of patients.
Inclusion criteria were: 1) age 16–75 years, 2) severely impaired mental status on admission, and 3) confirmed acute bacterial meningitis (ABM). Patients were initially included in the intervention group based on clinical suspicion of ABM with or without cerebrospinal fluid analysis. SQRM = Swedish National Quality Registry for ABM. ICP = intracranial pressure. NICU = neuro-intensive care unit. ICU = intensive care unit.
Figure 2The algorithm for treatment of increased intracranial pressure (ICP) in the neuro-intensive care unit (n = 52).
An external ventricular drainage (EVD) was established at operation in 50 patients with initial cerebrospinal fluid (Csf) drainage in 48 of these. A parenchymal ICP-monitor (Codman) was inserted in four cases. Bolus doses of Mannitol were administered in five cases prior to neuro-intervention. The shaded numbers represent different patients.
The main characteristics regarding demographic, etiological, clinical, and laboratory data, not identifying any significant difference between the intervention and control group, including comparison of the reaction level scale (RLS) values that were converted from Glasgow coma score (GCS) in the intervention group [27], [43].
| Intervention per protocol group | Control group | P-value | |
| n (%) | n (%) | ||
| Total 52 (100) | Total 53 (100) | ||
|
| 28/24 | 24/29 | 0.44 |
|
| 55 | 58 | 0.74 |
| Range | 16–74 | 18–74 | |
|
| 20 | [n = 52] 15 | 0.41 |
|
| [n = 51] | [n = 48] | |
| >24 hours | 6 (12) | 5 (10) | 1.00 |
| 12–24 hours | 15 (29) | 17 (35) | 0.67 |
| <12 hours | 30 (59) | 26 (54) | 0.69 |
|
| 13 (25) | [n = 51] 11 (22) | 0.82 |
|
| |||
| GCS ≤7/RLS ≥5 | 27 (52) | 21 (40) | 0.24 |
| GCS ≤4/RLS = 8 | 5 (10) | 3 (6) | 0.49 |
|
| 47 (90) | 44 (83) | 0.39 |
| Spinal opening pressure >400 mmH2O | [n = 21] 20 (95) | [n = 10] 9 (90) | 1.00 |
| Leukocyte count (×106/L) | [n = 47] | [n = 44] | |
| Median | 2400 | 2550 | 1.00 |
| Range | 7–34100 | 10–30500 | |
| <1000 | 16 (34) | 16 (36) | 0.83 |
| <100 | 4 (9) | 5 (11) | 0.73 |
| Lactate (mmol/L) | [n = 43] | [n = 33] | |
| Median | 12.4 | 14.6 | 0.92 |
| Range | 6.0–30.8 | 5.0–33.0 | |
|
| [n = 51] | ||
| <100 | 10 (19) | 6 (12) | 0.42 |
| <50 | 0 | 2 (4) | 0.24 |
|
| |||
| Range (hours) | 0–14 | 0–12 | |
| <2 hours | 37 (71) | 29 (56) | 0.71 |
| <1 hour | 17 (33) | 19 (37) | 0.84 |
|
| |||
|
| 41 (79) | 36 (68) | 0.27 |
|
| 8 (15) | 8 (15) | 1.00 |
| Other bacteria | 3 | 9 | 0.12 |
LP = lumbar puncture. Csf = cerebrospinal fluid.
When data was missing the numbers of patients with available data are shown [in brackets].
Malignancy/immunosuppresion: n = 10, Alcoholism: n = 5, Diabetes: n = 3, Splenectomized: n = 1, CSF-leakage: n = 1,
Malignancy/immunosuppresion: n = 5, Alcoholism: n = 3, Diabetes: n = 3, Splenectomized: n = 2, CSF leakage: n = 2.
S aureus: n = 2, L monocytogenes: n = 1.
S aureus: n = 4, H influenzae: n = 2, L monocytogenes: n = 1, S pyogenes geoup C: n = 1, E cloacae: n = 1.
Two tailed Fisher's exact test for proportions and Student T-test for normally distributed values.
Figure 3The highest levels of intracranial pressure (ICP), as observed continuously during episodes of more than 5 min, in the neuro-intensive care unit after initial cerebrospinal fluid drainage at operation; n = 52 (external ventricular drainage; n = 48, parenchymal ICP-monitor; n = 4).
The intracranial pressure (ICP; mmHg) as noted at operation (external ventricular drainage: n = 48; parenchymal ICP-monitor: n = 4), and the highest levels of ICP, noted continuously during episodes >5 min, at the neuro-intensive care unit (NICU), related to the outcome at follow-up after 2–6 months in the intervention per protocol group.
| ICP at operation | Normal | Elevated | Elevated or not analysed | |||
| ICP in NICU | <20 | <20 | 20–30 | 30–40 | >40 | |
| n = 9 | n = 8 | n = 24 | n = 6 | n = 5 | Total n = 52 | |
|
| ||||||
|
| 5 | 4 | 14 | 4 | 1 | 28 |
|
| 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 4 |
|
| 4 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 15 |
|
| 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 5 |
GOS = Glasgow outcome score.
*These patients ended up as follows;
a) Two with GOS 3, two with GOS 4.
b) Four with GOS 4.
c) One with GOS 3, four with GOS 4.
d) Two with GOS 4.
Intracranial pressure (ICP)-targeting therapy used in the intervention group, (n = 52, external ventricular drainage; n = 48, parenchymal ICP-monitor; n = 4).
| n | % | |
| Mannitol prior to intervention | 5 | 10 |
| Drainage of Csf at operation | 48 | 92 |
| Drainage of Csf at NICU | 46 | 88 |
| Hyperosmolar therapy | 21 | 40 |
| Hyperventilation | 13 | 25 |
| External cooling | 9 | 17 |
| Methylprednisolone | 3 | 6 |
| Barbiturate coma | 2 | 4 |
| No ICP-treatment in addition to deep sedation and mechanical ventilation in 30° sitting position | 3 | 6 |
Csf = cerebrospinal fluid; NICU = neuro-intensive care unit.
Outcomes at follow-up after 2–6 months in the intervention group and in the controls.
| Intervention group | Eligible as control patients | ||||
| Outcome | Intention to treat group | Per protocol group | Control group | Cases from Stockholm missed for intervention | NICU-treated cases outside Stockholm |
| n = 57 (%) | n = 52 (%) | n = 53 (%) | n = 12 (%) | n = 20 (%) | |
|
| 30 (53) | 28 (54) | 17 (32) | 4 (33) | 8 (40) |
|
| 4 (7) | 4 (8) | 6 (11) | 1 (8) | 1 (5) |
|
| 16 (28) | 15 (29) | 14 (26) | 4 (33) | 6 (30) |
|
| 7 (12) | 5 (10) | 16 (30) | 3 (25) | 5 (25) |
NICU = neuro-intensive care unit. GOS = Glasgow outcome score.
*p<0.05 with two-tailed Fisher's exact test when comparing the intention to treat group, and the per protocol group, with the control group.
Patients included as final controls according to inclusion and exclusion criteria.