PURPOSE: To investigate the usefulness of transcranial Doppler ultrasonography in the evaluation of intracranial pressure changes after head injury. METHODS: Transcranial Doppler examinations and intracranial pressure measurements using intraparenchymal monitors were performed in 12 cases of closed head injury. Twenty-four sets of data, including the Glasgow Coma Scale, intracranial pressure, transcranial Doppler, and carbon dioxide pressure were compared. The side-to-side difference in the resistivity index was also assessed. RESULTS: There was a significant correlation between increased pressure values and resistivity index when comparing measurements from the same side. There was no correlation between carbon dioxide pressure and any transcranial Doppler parameter or intracranial pressure measurement. No significant correlation was found between the resistivity index and the Glasgow Coma Scale. End diastolic velocity was a stronger determinant of resistivity index than peak systolic velocity. CONCLUSION: The relationship of ipsilateral measurements of intracranial pressure to resistivity index is valid. The resistivity index must be analyzed within the context of the particular disease studied, especially with respect to the hemodynamic alterations. Initial findings suggest that intracranial pressure monitoring cannot be replaced by serial transcranial Doppler measurements in the treatment of the patient with acute head injury.
PURPOSE: To investigate the usefulness of transcranial Doppler ultrasonography in the evaluation of intracranial pressure changes after head injury. METHODS: Transcranial Doppler examinations and intracranial pressure measurements using intraparenchymal monitors were performed in 12 cases of closed head injury. Twenty-four sets of data, including the Glasgow Coma Scale, intracranial pressure, transcranial Doppler, and carbon dioxide pressure were compared. The side-to-side difference in the resistivity index was also assessed. RESULTS: There was a significant correlation between increased pressure values and resistivity index when comparing measurements from the same side. There was no correlation between carbon dioxide pressure and any transcranial Doppler parameter or intracranial pressure measurement. No significant correlation was found between the resistivity index and the Glasgow Coma Scale. End diastolic velocity was a stronger determinant of resistivity index than peak systolic velocity. CONCLUSION: The relationship of ipsilateral measurements of intracranial pressure to resistivity index is valid. The resistivity index must be analyzed within the context of the particular disease studied, especially with respect to the hemodynamic alterations. Initial findings suggest that intracranial pressure monitoring cannot be replaced by serial transcranial Doppler measurements in the treatment of the patient with acute head injury.