[Specialized Concepts for the Management of Severe Neurotrauma]

Neurotrauma results from violence on structures of the central or peripheral nervous system and is a clinically common disease entity with high relevance for patients' long-term outcome. The application of evidence-based diagnostic and therapeutic concepts aims to minimize secondary injury and thus to improve treatment outcome. This article describes the current management of the two main injury patterns of neurotrauma - traumatic brain and spinal cord injury.

Spinal cord injury: Current trends in acute management

Introduction

Traumatic spinal cord injury (tSCI) is a profoundly debilitating condition necessitating prompt intervention. However, the optimal acute treatment strategy remains a subject of debate.

Research question

The aim of this overview is to elucidate prevailing trends in the acute tSCI management.

Material and Methods

We provided an overview using peer-reviewed studies.

Results

Early surgical treatment (<24h after trauma) appears beneficial compared to delayed surgery. Nonetheless, there is insufficient evidence supporting a positive influence of ultra-early surgery on neurological outcome in tSCI. Furthermore, the optimal surgical approach to decompress the spinal cord remains unclear. These uncertainties extend to a growing aging population suffering from central cord syndrome (CCS). Additionally, there is a paucity of evidence supporting the beneficial effects of strict hemodynamic management.

Discussion and Conclusion

This overview highlights the current literature on surgical timing, surgical techniques and hemodynamic management during the acute phase of tSCI. It also delves into considerations specific to the elderly population experiencing CCS.

Interventions to Optimize Spinal Cord Perfusion in Patients With Acute Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury: An Updated Systematic Review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review update.

OBJECTIVES

Interventions that aim to optimize spinal cord perfusion are thought to play an important role in minimizing secondary ischemic damage and improving outcomes in patients with acute traumatic spinal cord injuries (SCIs). However, exactly how to optimize spinal cord perfusion and enhance neurologic recovery remains controversial. We performed an update of a recent systematic review (Evaniew et al, J. Neurotrauma 2020) to evaluate the effects of Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP) support or Spinal Cord Perfusion Pressure (SCPP) support on neurological recovery and rates of adverse events among patients with acute traumatic SCI.

METHODS

We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE and ClinicalTrials.gov for new published reports. Two reviewers independently screened articles, extracted data, and evaluated risk of bias. We implemented the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to rate confidence in the quality of the evidence.

RESULTS

From 569 potentially relevant new citations since 2019, we identified 9 new studies for inclusion, which were combined with 19 studies from a prior review to give a total of 28 studies. According to low or very low quality evidence, the effect of MAP support on neurological recovery is uncertain, and increased SCPP may be associated with improved neurological recovery. Both approaches may involve risks for specific adverse events, but the importance of these adverse events to patients remains unclear. Very low quality evidence failed to yield reliable guidance about particular monitoring techniques, perfusion ranges, pharmacological agents, or durations of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This update provides an evidence base to support the development of a new clinical practice guideline for the hemodynamic management of patients with acute traumatic SCI. While avoidance of hypotension and maintenance of spinal cord perfusion are important principles in the management of an acute SCI, the literature does not provide high quality evidence in support of a particular protocol. Further prospective, controlled research studies with objective validated outcome assessments are required to examine interventions to optimize spinal cord perfusion in this setting.

The Winnipeg Intraspinal Pressure Monitoring Study (WISP): A protocol for validation of fiberoptic pressure monitoring for acute traumatic spinal cord injury

Background

Research efforts have been focused on limiting secondary injury after traumatic spinal cord injury by performing spinal decompression and early optimization of spinal cord perfusion. The Winnipeg Intraspinal Pressure Monitoring Study (WISP) was designed to validate the technique of intraspinal pressure monitoring at the site of injury using a fiberoptic pressure monitor placed at the site of injury.

Objectives

To describe the design of the WISP study.

Study design

Descriptive.

Methods

We explain the current limitations in the available scientific literature around the topic of blood pressure management for acute traumatic spinal cord injury and rational for the WISP study. Then, we describe the design of WISP including the patient selection criteria, study interventions, follow up schedules and outcome measurements. A multitude of future research avenues are also discussed.

Results

The WISP study is a single center pilot study designed to validate the technique of intraspinal pressure monitoring following acute traumatic spinal cord injury. The study involves the measurement of intraspinal pressure from within the subarachnoid space at the site of injury to derive a number of physiological parameters including spinal cord perfusion pressure, spinal cord blood volume, measures of spinal cord compliance and vascular reactivity indices. Twenty eligible patients will be recruited and followed for a period of 12 months with visits scheduled for the first 5 days and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months following surgical intervention.

Conclusions

The WISP study will provide the first attempt in North America at validation of intraspinal pressure monitoring with a fiberoptic pressure monitor at the site of injury. Successful validation will lead to future studies to define optimal spinal cord perfusion pressure, relationships of neural injury biomarkers and outcomes as well as epigenetic studies.

Trial registration

This study has been registered at clinicaltrials.gov (registration# NCT04550117).

Excavating FAIR Data: the Case of the Multicenter Animal Spinal Cord Injury Study (MASCIS), Blood Pressure, and Neuro-Recovery

Meta-analyses suggest that the published literature represents only a small minority of the total data collected in biomedical research, with most becoming 'dark data' unreported in the literature. Dark data is due to publication bias toward novel results that confirm investigator hypotheses and omission of data that do not. Publication bias contributes to scientific irreproducibility and failures in bench-to-bedside translation. Sharing dark data by making it Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR) may reduce the burden of irreproducible science by increasing transparency and support data-driven discoveries beyond the lifecycle of the original study. We illustrate feasibility of dark data sharing by recovering original raw data from the Multicenter Animal Spinal Cord Injury Study (MASCIS), an NIH-funded multi-site preclinical drug trial conducted in the 1990s that tested efficacy of several therapies after a spinal cord injury (SCI). The original drug treatments did not produce clear positive results and MASCIS data were stored in boxes for more than two decades. The goal of the present study was to independently confirm published machine learning findings that perioperative blood pressure is a major predictor of SCI neuromotor outcome (Nielson et al., 2015). We recovered, digitized, and curated the data from 1125 rats from MASCIS. Analyses indicated that high perioperative blood pressure at the time of SCI is associated with poorer health and worse neuromotor outcomes in more severe SCI, whereas low perioperative blood pressure is associated with poorer health and worse neuromotor outcome in moderate SCI. These findings confirm and expand prior results that a narrow window of blood-pressure control optimizes outcome, and demonstrate the value of recovering dark data for assessing reproducibility of findings with implications for precision therapeutic approaches.

Hemodynamic Management of Acute Spinal Cord Injury: A Literature Review

The goal of acute spinal cord injury (SCI) management is to reduce secondary injuries and improve neurological recovery after its occurrence. This review aimed to explore the literature regarding hemodynamic management to reduce ischemic secondary injury and improve neurologic outcome following acute SCI. The PubMed database was searched for studies investigating blood flow, mean arterial pressure (MAP), and spinal cord perfusion pressure after SCI. The 2013 guidelines of the American Association of Neurological Surgeons/Congress of Neurological Surgeons recommended maintaining MAP at 85-90 mmHg for 7 days after SCI to potentially improve outcome. However, this recommendation was based on weak evidence for neurologic benefit. The maintenance of MAP will typically require vasopressors, which may have their own set of complications. More recently, studies have suggested the potential importance of considering spinal cord perfusion pressure in addition to the MAP. Further research on the hemodynamic management of acute SCI is required to determine how to optimize neurologic recovery. Evidence-based guidelines for hemodynamic management should acknowledge the gaps in knowledge and the limitations of the current literature.

Interventions to Optimize Spinal Cord Perfusion in Patients with Acute Traumatic Spinal Cord Injuries: A Systematic Review

Interventions to optimize spinal cord perfusion via support of mean arterial pressure (MAP) or spinal cord perfusion pressure (SCPP) are thought to play a critical role in the management of patients with acute traumatic spinal cord injuries, but there is ongoing controversy about efficacy and safety. We aimed to determine the effects of optimizing spinal cord perfusion on neurological recovery and risks for adverse events. We searched multiple databases for published and unpublished reports. Two reviewers independently screened articles, extracted data, and evaluated risk of bias. We synthesized data and evaluated confidence in anticipated treatment effects according to the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. We identified 20 eligible observational studies and 1 eligible randomized controlled trial. According to low or very low quality evidence, the effect of MAP support on neurological recovery after acute traumatic spinal cord injury is uncertain, and the use of vasopressors to support MAP may be associated with increased rates of predominantly cardiac adverse events. Increased SCPP appears likely to be associated with improved neurological recovery, but SCPP monitoring via intradural catheters at the anatomical site of injury may involve increased risks of cerebrospinal fluid leakage requiring revision surgery or pseudomeningocele. No study directly compared the effects of specific MAP goal ranges, SCPP ranges, SCPP monitoring techniques, or durations of treatment. Very low quality evidence suggests that norepinephrine may have less risk of adverse events than dopamine. The current literature is insufficient to make strong recommendations about interventions to support spinal cord perfusion via MAP or SCPP goals in patients with acute traumatic spinal cord injuries. Data are compatible with a variety of treatment decisions, and individualized approaches may be optimal. Further investigation to clarify the risks, benefits, and alternatives to MAP or SCPP support in this population is warranted.

Bet 1: Can induced hypertension improve outcome following acute traumatic spinal cord injury?

A shortcut review was carried out to establish whether augmentation of blood pressure to a high mean arterial pressure (MAP) target in the early phase of traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI) could lead to improvements in morbidity or mortality. 23 directly relevant papers were found using the reported search strategy. Of these, two systematic reviews collated the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The author, date and country of publication; patient group studied; study type; relevant outcomes; results and study weaknesses of the best papers are tabulated. It is concluded that data from observational cohort studies support high MAP targets and avoidance of hypotension in the early stages of traumatic SCI, but there are insufficient trial data to support routine use as best practice. Given the intervention carries risk, induced hypertension requires careful consideration on a case-by-case basis.