Preliminary experience of the estimation of cerebral perfusion pressure using transcranial Doppler ultrasonography

E A Schmidt, M Czosnyka, I Gooskens, S K Piechnik, B F Matta, P C Whitfield, J D Pickard, E A Schmidt, M Czosnyka, I Gooskens, S K Piechnik, B F Matta, P C Whitfield, J D Pickard

Abstract

Objective: The direct calculation of cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) as the difference between mean arterial pressure and intracranial pressure (ICP) produces a number which does not always adequately describe conditions for brain perfusion. A non-invasive method of CPP measurement has previously been reported based on waveform analysis of blood flow velocity measured in the middle cerebral artery (MCA) by transcranial Doppler. This study describes the results of clinical tests of the prototype bilateral transcranial Doppler based apparatus for non-invasive CPP measurement (nCPP).

Methods: Twenty five consecutive, paralysed, sedated, and ventilated patients with head injury were studied. Intracranial pressure (ICP) and arterial blood pressure (ABP) were monitored continuously. The left and right MCAs were insonated daily (108 measurements) using a purpose built transcranial Doppler monitor (Neuro Q(TM), Deltex Ltd, Chichester, UK) with software capable of the non-invasive estimation of CPP. Time averaged values of mean and diastolic flow velocities (FVm, FVd) and ABP were calculated. nCPP was then computed as: ABPxFVd/FVm+14.

Results: The absolute difference between real CPP and nCPP (daily averages) was less than 10 mm Hg in 89% of measurements and less than 13 mm Hg in 92% of measurements. The 95% confidence range for predictors was no wider than +/-12 mm Hg (n=25) for the CPP, varying from 70 to 95 mm Hg. The absolute value of side to side differences in nCPP was significantly greater (p<0.05) when CT based evidence of brain swelling was present and was also positively correlated (p<0.05) with mean ICP.

Conclusion: The device is of potential benefit for intermittent or continuous monitoring of brain perfusion pressure in situations where the direct measurement is not available or its reliability is in question.

References

    1. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 1999 Apr;19(4):452-9
    1. J Neurosurg. 1999 Jul;91(1):11-9
    1. J Neurosurg. 1998 May;88(5):802-8
    1. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 1998 Mar;18(3):332-43
    1. Neurol Res. 1991 Dec;13(4):248-52
    1. Acta Neurochir Suppl. 1998;71:255-7
    1. Crit Care Med. 1998 Sep;26(9):1576-81
    1. Prog Brain Res. 1972;35:411-32
    1. Lancet. 1986 Feb 8;1(8476):307-10
    1. J Neurol. 1988 Jan;235(3):159-62
    1. J Neurosurg. 1989 Nov;71(5 Pt 1):673-80
    1. Stroke. 1992 Jan;23(1):15-9
    1. J Neurosurg. 1998 Dec;89(6):971-82
    1. J Neurosurg. 1992 Jul;77(1):55-61
    1. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol. 1994 Jan;6(1):4-14
    1. J Neurosurg. 1995 Dec;83(6):949-62
    1. J Neurosurg. 1997 Feb;86(2):241-51
    1. J Neurosurg. 1997 Mar;86(3):505-10
    1. Stroke. 1997 Mar;28(3):603-7; discussion 608

Source: PubMed

Sponsorzy i współpracownicy

Warunki medyczne

Interwencje lekowe

3
Subskrybuj