The crisis of the third day in intracranial pressure dynamics following traumatic brain injury, fact or fiction?

IF 1.9 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Brain & spine Pub Date : 2024-11-14 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.bas.2024.104135
R D Singh, M W H Bolscher, J T J M van Dijck, R J G Vreeburg, I A M van Erp, V Lubrano, G C W de Ruiter, B Depreitere, S C Cannegieter, B Siegerink, T A van Essen, W C Peul
{"title":"The crisis of the third day in intracranial pressure dynamics following traumatic brain injury, fact or fiction?","authors":"R D Singh, M W H Bolscher, J T J M van Dijck, R J G Vreeburg, I A M van Erp, V Lubrano, G C W de Ruiter, B Depreitere, S C Cannegieter, B Siegerink, T A van Essen, W C Peul","doi":"10.1016/j.bas.2024.104135","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In 1960, Lazorthes and Campman introduced the concept of a <i>'crisis of the third day',</i> which gained prominence in the field of traumatic brain injury (TBI), where it relates to neurological deterioration on the third day after injury. However, evidence regarding this phenomenon remains scarce.</p><p><strong>Research question: </strong>This study aimed to analyze posttraumatic intracranial pressure (ICP) patterns in a large European cohort to investigate the existence of a third-day crisis and its impact on 12-month functional outcomes.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Data were analyzed from the prospective Collaborative European Neurotrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. Patients with TBI admitted to ICUs in 65 European centers who received ICP monitoring were included. ICP measurements, averaged per day, were analyzed using mixed models. The association between ICP peak timing and functional outcome was examined with multivariable logistic regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 886 patients. Average ICP trajectories showed no significant changes over the first seven days post-injury, without elevation around the third day. Among 563 patients with ICP >20 during the first week, 45% reached their highest ICP after the third day. Elevated ICP (>20 mmHg) during the first week was associated with unfavorable 12-month outcomes, but the timing of ICP peak was not linked to functional outcomes.</p><p><strong>Discussion and conclusion: </strong>This multicenter study challenges the 'crisis of the third day' concept. No distinct ICP or TIL elevations were observed around the third day. Elevated ICP remains a prognostic indicator, but ICP peak timing does not correlate with functional outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":72443,"journal":{"name":"Brain & spine","volume":"4 ","pages":"104135"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11647161/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brain & spine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bas.2024.104135","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: In 1960, Lazorthes and Campman introduced the concept of a 'crisis of the third day', which gained prominence in the field of traumatic brain injury (TBI), where it relates to neurological deterioration on the third day after injury. However, evidence regarding this phenomenon remains scarce.

Research question: This study aimed to analyze posttraumatic intracranial pressure (ICP) patterns in a large European cohort to investigate the existence of a third-day crisis and its impact on 12-month functional outcomes.

Materials and methods: Data were analyzed from the prospective Collaborative European Neurotrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. Patients with TBI admitted to ICUs in 65 European centers who received ICP monitoring were included. ICP measurements, averaged per day, were analyzed using mixed models. The association between ICP peak timing and functional outcome was examined with multivariable logistic regression.

Results: The study included 886 patients. Average ICP trajectories showed no significant changes over the first seven days post-injury, without elevation around the third day. Among 563 patients with ICP >20 during the first week, 45% reached their highest ICP after the third day. Elevated ICP (>20 mmHg) during the first week was associated with unfavorable 12-month outcomes, but the timing of ICP peak was not linked to functional outcomes.

Discussion and conclusion: This multicenter study challenges the 'crisis of the third day' concept. No distinct ICP or TIL elevations were observed around the third day. Elevated ICP remains a prognostic indicator, but ICP peak timing does not correlate with functional outcomes.

外伤性脑损伤后第三天颅内压动态危机,事实还是虚构?
导言:1960 年,Lazorthes 和 Campman 提出了 "第三天危机 "的概念,这一概念在创伤性脑损伤(TBI)领域得到了广泛应用,它与伤后第三天的神经功能恶化有关。然而,有关这一现象的证据仍然很少:本研究旨在分析欧洲大型队列中的创伤后颅内压(ICP)模式,以调查第三天危机的存在及其对 12 个月功能预后的影响:对欧洲创伤性脑损伤神经创伤有效性合作研究(CENTER-TBI)的前瞻性研究数据进行了分析。欧洲 65 个中心的重症监护室收治了接受 ICP 监测的 TBI 患者。研究人员使用混合模型分析了ICP测量值(每天的平均值)。采用多变量逻辑回归分析了ICP峰值时间与功能预后之间的关系:研究纳入了 886 名患者。ICP的平均轨迹在伤后前七天内没有明显变化,在第三天左右没有升高。在第一周ICP>20的563名患者中,45%的患者在第三天后达到最高ICP值。第一周的ICP升高(>20 mmHg)与12个月的不良预后有关,但ICP达到峰值的时间与功能预后无关:这项多中心研究对 "第三天危机 "的概念提出了质疑。在第三天左右没有观察到明显的ICP或TIL升高。ICP升高仍是一个预后指标,但ICP达到峰值的时间与功能预后无关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Brain & spine
Brain & spine Surgery
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
71 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信