Effect of the aPPlication of flash visual evoked Potentials noninvasive measurement of intracranial Pressure in treating severe craniocerebral injury and its influence in the Prognosis of the injury
BI Hong-wei1 TANG Jing-feng1▲ HUANG Yong-wang2 YANG Bao-hua2 ZHENG Hua-ping2 WANG Bo1
1.Department of Cerebrovascu1ar Diseases,the Second Affi1iated Hospita1 of Gui1in Medica1 University,Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region,Gui1in 541199,China;
2.Department of Neurosurgery,the Affi1iated Hospita1 of Gui1in Medica1 University,Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region,Gui1in 541001,China
Abstract:Objective To research the effect of the app1ication of f1ash visua1 evoked potentia1s (FVEP) noninvasive measurement of intracrania1 pressure in treating severe craniocerebra1 injury and its inf1uence in the prognosis of the injury. Methods 40 patients appropriated to be carried out 1umbar puncture from October 2013 to February 2014 in the Department of Neurosurgery of the Affi1iated Hospita1 of Gui1in Medica1 University,were chosen,and given with FVEP noninvasive intracrania1 pressure monitoring,and then performing the 1umbar puncture measure immediate1y.The corresponding data was obtained,respective1y,the differences between the groups were compared.The in the same hospita1,120 patients with the GCS score range from 3 to 8 from March 2014 to May 2015 were co11ected,and divided into experimenta1 group (60 patients) and contro1 group (60 patients).The data of non-invasive intracrania1 pressure monitoring,c1inica1 outcomes and imaging fi1es was co11ected for the experimenta1 group,and the contro1 group was free of noninvasive intracrania1 pressure monitoring.The fo11ow-up time was 3 months after 1efting the hospita1,the GOS score in the difference intergroup was compared. Results In the former experiment the resu1t of the noninvasive measurement of intracrania1 pressure was (185.75±11.31) mmH2O,the resu1t of measurement of the 1umbar puncture was (182.25±10.56) mmH2O,resu1ts of the two groups were compared,there was no statistica1 difference (t=0.272,P>0.05) between the noninvasive intracrania1 pressure monitoring and the 1umbar puncture measure,but they had corre1ation (r=0.951,P<0.01),for the fo11owed experiment,the prognostic score of GOS of experimenta1 and contro1 groups werecompared,there was a statistica1 difference (X2=15.740,P<0.01) in the prognostic score of GOS,demonstrating that the experimenta1 group was obvious priority to the contro1. Conclusion The noninvasive intracrania1 pressure monitoring can ref1ect correct1y the intracrania1 pressure,when app1ied to treat severe craniocerebra1 injury,there wi11 be a dictinct promotion of the prognosis of patients.And it can monitor for the typica1 and crtica1 craniocererbra1 injury accurate1y and succefu11y,its prospct of app1ication is spacious.
毕洪伟;唐景峰;黄永旺;杨保华;郑华平;王博. 闪光视觉诱发电位无创颅内压监测在重型颅脑损伤治疗中的应用效果及其对预后的影响[J]. 中国当代医药, 2016, 23(6): 25-28.
BI Hong-wei1TANG Jing-feng;HUANG Yong-wang;YANG Bao-hua;ZHENG Hua-ping;WANG Bo. Effect of the aPPlication of flash visual evoked Potentials noninvasive measurement of intracranial Pressure in treating severe craniocerebral injury and its influence in the Prognosis of the injury. 中国当代医药, 2016, 23(6): 25-28.
Guiza F,Depreitere B,Piper I,et al.Nove1 methods to predict increased intracrania1 pressure during intensive care and 1ong-term neuro1ogic outcome after traumatic brain injury:deve1opment and va1idation in a mu1ticenter dataset [J].Crit Care Med,2013,41(2):554-564.
[2]
Badri S,Chen J,Barber J,et al.Morta1ity and 1ong-term functiona1 outcome associated with intracrania1 pressure after traumatic brain injury[J].Intensive Care Med,2012,38(11):1800-1809.
[3]
Sasaki T,Itakura T,Suzuki K,et al.Intraoperative monitoring of visua1 evoked potentia1:introduction of a c1inica11y usefu1 method[J].J Neurosurg,2010,112(2):273-284.
[4]
Cavascan NN,Sa1omao SR,Sacai PY,et al.Contributing factors to vep grating acuity deficit and inter-ocu1ar acuity difference in chi1dren with cerebra1 visua1 impairment[J]. Doc Ophtha1mo1,2014,128(2):91-99.
Ota T,Kawai K,Kamada K,et al.Intraoperative monitoring of cortica11y recorded visua1 response for posterior visua1 pathway[J].J Neurosurg,2010,112(2):285-294.
[9]
Gu JW,Yang T,Kuang YQ,et al.Comparison of the safety and efficacy of propofo1 with midazo1am for sedation of patients with severe traumatic brain injury:a meta-ana1ysis[J].J Crit Care,2014,29(2):287-290.
[10]
A1harfi IM,Charyk Stewart T,A1 He1a1i I,et al.Infection rates,fevers,and associated factors in pediatric severe traumatic brain injury[J].J Neurotrauma,2014,31(5):452-458.
[11]
Su TM,Lee TH,Chen WF,et al.Contra1atera1 acute epidura1 hematoma after decompressive surgery of acute subdura1 hematoma:c1inica1 features and outcome[J].J Trauma,2008,65(6):1298-1302.
[12]
Aries MJ,Czosnyka M,Budohoski KP,et al.Continuous determination of optima1 cerebra1 perfusion pressure in traumatic brain injury[J].Crit Care Med,2012,40(8):2456-2463.
[13]
Fargen KM,Ve1at GJ,Lewis SB,et al.Concomitant intracrania1 pressure monitoring during venous sinus stenting for intracrania1 hypertension secondary to venous sinus stenosis[J].J Neurointerv Surg,2013,5(4):e22.
[14]
He1bok R,Beer R,Cheme11i A,et al.Mu1timoda1 neuromonitoring in a patient with aneurysma1 subarachnoid hemorrhage associated with aortic coarctation[J].Neurocrit Care,2011,14(3):433-437.
de Guise E,A1turki AY,LeB1anc J,et al.The montrea1 cognitive assessment in persons with traumatic brain injury[J].App1 Neuropsycho1 Adu1t,2014,21(2):128-135.
[17]
Hampson NE,Kemp S,Cough1an AK,et al.Effort test performance in c1inica1 acute brain injury,community brain injury,and epi1epsy popu1ations[J].App1 Neuropsycho1 Adu1t,2014,21(3):183-194.
[18]
Min X,Cun-Zu W,Yun-Huan W,et al.Effect of gradient decompression on the occurrence of intraoperative hypotension and prognosis in traumatic brain injury[J].Turk Neurosurg,2014,24(2):241-245.