Cerebral Autoregulation and Neurovascular Coupling after Craniospinal Irradiation in Long-Term Survivors of Malignant Pediatric Brain Tumors of the Posterior Fossa

Cerebral autoregulation in paediatric and neonatal intensive care: A scoping review

Deranged cerebral autoregulation (CA) is associated with worse outcome in adult brain injury. Strategies for monitoring CA and maintaining the brain at its 'best CA status' have been implemented, however, this approach has not yet developed for the paediatric population. This scoping review aims to find up-to-date evidence on CA assessment in children and neonates with a view to identify patient categories in which CA has been measured so far, CA monitoring methods and its relationship with clinical outcome if any. A literature search was conducted for studies published within 31st December 2022 in 3 bibliographic databases. Out of 494 papers screened, this review includes 135 studies. Our literature search reveals evidence for CA measurement in the paediatric population across different diagnostic categories and age groups. The techniques adopted, indices and thresholds used to assess and define CA are heterogeneous. We discuss the relevance of available evidence for CA assessment in the paediatric population. However, due to small number of studies and heterogeneity of methods used, there is no conclusive evidence to support universal adoption of CA monitoring, technique, and methodology. This calls for further work to understand the clinical impact of CA monitoring in paediatric and neonatal intensive care.

Reliability and validity of the mean flow index (Mx) for assessing cerebral autoregulation in humans: A systematic review of the methodology

Cerebral autoregulation is a complex mechanism that serves to keep cerebral blood flow relatively constant within a wide range of cerebral perfusion pressures. The mean flow index (Mx) is one of several methods to assess dynamic cerebral autoregulation, but its reliability and validity have never been assessed systematically. The purpose of the present systematic review was to evaluate the methodology, reliability and validity of Mx.Based on 128 studies, we found inconsistency in the pre-processing of the recordings and the methods for calculation of Mx. The reliability in terms of repeatability and reproducibility ranged from poor to excellent, with optimal repeatability when comparing overlapping recordings. The discriminatory ability varied depending on the patient populations; in general, those with acute brain injury exhibited a higher Mx than healthy volunteers. The prognostic ability in terms of functional outcome and mortality ranged from chance result to moderate accuracy.Since the methodology was inconsistent between studies, resulting in varying reliability and validity estimates, the results were difficult to compare. The optimal method for deriving Mx is currently unknown.