Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T02:51:24.145Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 13 - Severe Traumatic Brain Injury

from Part II - Neurosurgery-Specific Bioethics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 May 2020

Stephen Honeybul
Affiliation:
Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Royal Perth and Fiona Stanley Hospitals
Get access

Summary

For many years, the management of severe TBI has been based on information gained from intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring. The rationale for its use is based on the three Ps of prognosis, perfusion, and pathology of TBI, with the hope that using ICP to guide therapy would prevent secondary brain injury and ultimately improve neurological outcome.However, one of the fundamental challenges in neurotrauma has been the inability to demonstrate that the fall in ICP achieved by these measures is subsequently translated into an improvement in clinical outcome. For years, patients with severe TBI were routinely hyperventilated, frequently placed in a barbiturate coma, or more recently rendered hypothermic, because these measures consistently reduce intracranial pressure. However, clinical studies have failed to show that lowering intracranial pressure by these techniques provides clinical benefit, and in some instances they may have caused harm. It is this regard that the use of decompressive craniectomy was thought to be promising, and there have now been two large multicentre randomised controlled trials investigating efficacy of the procedure. The results provide good evidence to guide practice but also raise ethical issues regarding the use of a procedure that reduces mortality but increases survival with severe disability.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bratton, S. L., Chestnut, R. M., Ghajar, J., et al. Brain trauma foundation; American association of neurological surgeons; congress of neurological surgeons; joint section on neurotrauma and critical care, AANS/CNS. Guidelines for the management of severe traumatic brain injury. J. Neurotrauma. 2007; 24, suppl. 1s.Google Scholar
Honeybul, S., An update on the management of traumatic brain injury. J. Neurosurg. Sci. 2011; 55: 34355.Google ScholarPubMed
Chesnut, R. M., Temkin, N., Carney, N., et al. A trial of intracranial-pressure monitoring in traumatic brain injury. N. Engl. J. Med. 2012; 367: 247181.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Honeybul, S. Reconsidering the role of hypothermia in management of severe traumatic brain injury. J. Clin. Neurosci. 2016; 28: 1215.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cooper, D. J., Rosenfeld, J. V., Murray, L., et al. Decompressive craniectomy in diffuse traumatic brain injury. the DECRA Trial Investigators and the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group. N. Engl. J. Med. 2011; 364: 14931502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchinson, P. J., Kolias, A. G., Timofeev, I. S., et al. RESCUEicp trial collaborators. Trial of decompressive craniectomy for traumatic intracranial hypertension. N. Engl. J. Med. 2016; 375: 111930.Google Scholar
Honeybul, S., Ho, K. M., Gillett, G. R. Long-term outcome following decompressive craniectomy: an inconvenient truth? Curr. Opin. Crit. Care 2018; 24: 97104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Honeybul, S., Gillett, G. R., Ho, K. M., et al. Is life worth living? Decompressive craniectomy and the disability paradox. J. Neurosurg. 2016; 125: 7758.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Perel, P., Arango, M., Clayton, T., et al. Predicting outcome after brain injury: Practical prognostic models based on a large cohort of international patients. BMJ 2008; 336: 4259.Google ScholarPubMed
Murray, G. D., Butcher, I., McHugh, G. S., et al. Multivariable prognostic analysis in traumatic brain injury: results from the IMPACT study. J. Neurotrauma 2007; 24: 32937.Google Scholar
Honeybul, S., Ho, K. M. Predicting long-term neurological outcomes after severe traumatic brain injury requiring decompressive craniectomy: A comparison of the CRASH and IMPACT prognostic models. Injury 2016; 47: 188692.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×