Advertisement

Neurocritical Care

, Volume 30, Issue 1, pp 42–50 | Cite as

Non-invasive Cerebrovascular Autoregulation Assessment Using the Volumetric Reactivity Index: Prospective Study

  • Vytautas PetkusEmail author
  • Aidanas Preiksaitis
  • Solventa Krakauskaite
  • Laimonas Bartusis
  • Romanas Chomskis
  • Yasin Hamarat
  • Erika Zubaviciute
  • Saulius Vosylius
  • Saulius Rocka
  • Arminas Ragauskas
Original Article

Abstract

Background

This prospective study of an innovative non-invasive ultrasonic cerebrovascular autoregulation (CA) monitoring method is based on real-time measurements of intracranial blood volume (IBV) reactions following changes in arterial blood pressure. In this study, we aimed to determine the clinical applicability of a non-invasive CA monitoring method by performing a prospective comparative clinical study of simultaneous invasive and non-invasive CA monitoring on intensive care patients.

Methods

CA was monitored in 61 patients with severe traumatic brain injuries invasively by calculating the pressure reactivity index (PRx) and non-invasively by calculating the volumetric reactivity index (VRx) simultaneously. The PRx was calculated as a moving correlation coefficient between intracranial pressure and arterial blood pressure slow waves. The VRx was calculated as a moving correlation coefficient between arterial blood pressure and non-invasively-measured IBV slow waves.

Results

A linear regression between VRx and PRx averaged per patients’ monitoring session showed a significant correlation (r = 0.843, p < 0.001; 95% confidence interval 0.751 – 0.903). The standard deviation of the difference between VRx and PRx was 0.192; bias was − 0.065.

Conclusions

This prospective clinical study of the non-invasive ultrasonic volumetric reactivity index VRx monitoring, based on ultrasonic time-of-flight measurements of IBV dynamics, showed significant coincidence of non-invasive VRx index with invasive PRx index. The ultrasonic time-of-flight method reflects blood volume changes inside the acoustic path, which crosses both hemispheres of the brain. This method does not reflect locally and invasively-recorded intracranial pressure slow waves, but the autoregulatory reactions of both hemispheres of the brain. Therefore, VRx can be used as a non-invasive cerebrovascular autoregulation index in the same way as PRx and can also provide information about the CA status encompassing all intracranial hemodynamics.

Keywords

Cerebrovascular autoregulation Pressure reactivity index Non-invasive monitoring Ultrasonic time-of-flight measurement method Traumatic brain injury patients 

Notes

Author Contributions

Arminas Ragauskas and Vytautas Petkus initiated the research. Aidanas Preiksaitis, Saulius Rocka, Saulius Vosylius, and Erika Zubaviciute gathered the clinical findings of patients and prepared the study protocol and documents to obtain ethical approval. Vytautas Petkus, Romanas Chomskis, Solventa Krakauskaite, and Aidanas Preiksaitis gathered and processed patient monitoring data. Yasin Hamarat and Laimonas Bartusis performed statistical tests. Romanas Chomskis, Vytautas Petkus, Saulius Vosylius, and Aidanas Preiksaitis supervised equipment and software use while collecting monitoring data. Vytautas Petkus, Solventa Krakauskaite, Laimonas Bartusis, and Yasin Hamarat contributed to the writing of the manuscript. Arminas Ragauskas and Saulius Rocka supervised the preparation of study results and contributed to the final manuscript. All authors discussed the study results and approved the final version of manuscript.

Source of support

This research was supported by the Research Council of Lithuania (Grant No. MIP-087/2015) and European Commission FP7-HEALTH (Grant No. 602150).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

Arminas Ragauskas have ownership interests in Boston Neurosciences (Lexington, Massachusetts USA) which intend to commercialize the non-invasive cerebrovascular autoregulation monitoring technology. Arminas Ragauskas and Vytautas Petkus are inventors of apparatus and method of non-invasive cerebrovascular autoregulation monitoring. Vytautas Petkus, Romanas Chomskis, Aidanas Preiksaitis, Saulius Rocka and Arminas Ragauskas report grant and personal fees from Research Council of Lithuania (Grant No. MIP-087/2015). Aidanas Preiksaitis, Saulius Rocka and Arminas Ragauskas report grant and personal fees from European Commission FP7-HEALTH (Grant No. 602150).

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was obtained from the Vilnius Regional Biomedical Research Ethics Committee (Protocol No. 158200-06-498-145, Protocol No. 2012-06-12, 158200-15-801-323, 2015-10-06 and Protocol No. 158200-16-854-364, 2016-07-12). A written informed consent was obtained from each patient or an appropriate relative.

References

  1. 1.
    Paulson OB, Strandgaard S, Edvinsson L. Cerebral autoregulation. Cerebrovasc Brain Metab Rev. 1990;2:161–92.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chillon JM, Baumbach GL. Autoregulation: arterial and intracranial pressure. In: Edvinsson L, Krause DN, editors. Cerebral blood flow and metabolism. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2002. p. 395–412.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sviri GE, Newell DW. Cerebral autoregulation following traumatic brain injury. Open Neurosurg J. 2010;3:6–9.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Czosnyka M, Brady K, Reinhard M, Smielewski P, Steiner LA. Monitoring of cerebrovascular autoregulation: facts, myths, and missing links. Neurocrit Care. 2009;10:373–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Czosnyka M, Smielewski P, Kirkpatrick P, Laing RG, Menon D, Pickard JD. Continuous assessment of the cerebral vasomotor reactivity in head injury. Neurosurgery. 1997;41:11–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Preiksaitis A, Krakauskaite S, Petkus V, et al. Association of severe traumatic brain injury patient outcomes with duration of cerebrovascular autoregulation impairment events. Neurosurgery. 2016;79:75–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sorrentino EJ, Diedler J, Kasprowicz M, et al. Critical thresholds for cerebrovascular reactivity after traumatic brain injury. Neurocrit Care. 2012;16:258–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Aries MJH, Czosnyka M, Budohoski KP, et al. Continuous determination of optimal cerebral perfusion pressure in traumatic brain injury. Crit Care Med. 2012;40:2456–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zweifel C, Lavinio A, Steiner LA, et al. Continuous monitoring of cerebrovascular pressure reactivity in patients with head injury. Neurosurg Focus. 2008;25:E2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Depreitere B, Güiza F, Van den Berghe G, et al. Pressure autoregulation monitoring and cerebral perfusion pressure target recommendation in patients with severe traumatic brain injury based on minute-by-minute monitoring data. J Neurosurg. 2014;120:1451–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Le Roux P, Menon DK, Citerio G, et al. Consensus summary statement of the international multidisciplinary consensus conference on multimodality monitoring in neurocritical care: a statement for healthcare professionals from the Neurocritical Care Society and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Neurocrit Care. 2014;40:1189–209.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Steiner LA, Czosnyka M, Piechnik SK, et al. Continuous monitoring of cerebrovascular pressure reactivity allows determination of optimal cerebral perfusion pressure in patients with traumatic brain injury. Crit Care Med. 2002;30:733–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Petkus V, Preiksaitis A, Krakauskaite S, et al. Benefit on optimal cerebral perfusion pressure targeted treatment for traumatic brain injury patients. J Crit Care. 2017;41:49–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rasulo FA, Girardini A, Lavinio A, et al. Are optimal cerebral perfusion pressure and cerebrovascular autoregulation related to longterm outcome in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage? J Neurosurg Anesthesiol. 2012;24:3–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Czosnyka M, Smielewski P, Kirkpatrick P, Menon DK, Pickard JD. Monitoring of cerebral autoregulation in head-injured patients. Stroke. 1996;27:1829–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Eames PJ, Blake MJ, Dawson SL, Panerai RB, Potter JF. Dynamic cerebral autoregulation and beat to beat blood pressure control are impaired in acute ischaemic stroke. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2002;72:467–73.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Spiegelberg A, Preuß M, Kurtcuoglu V. B-waves revisited. Interdiscip Neurosurg. 2016;6:13–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schmidt B, Reinhard M, Lezaic V, et al. Autoregulation monitoring and outcome prediction in neurocritical care patients: does one index fit all? J Clin Monit Comput. 2016;30:367–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Czosnyka M, Czosnyka Z, Momjian S, Pickard JD. Cerebrospinal fluid dynamics. Physiol Meas. 2004;25:R51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Larsen FS, Olsen KS, Hansen BA, Paulson OB, Knudsen GM. Transcranial doppler is valid for determination of the lower limit of cerebral blood flow autoregulation. Stroke. 1994;25:1985–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lang EW, Mehdorn HM, Dorsch NW, Czosnyka M. Continuous monitoring of cerebrovascular autoregulation: a validation study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2002;72:583–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zweifel C, Castellani G, Czosnyka M, et al. Continuous assessment of cerebral autoregulation with near-infrared spectroscopy in adults after subarachnoid hemorrhage. Stroke. 2010;41:1963–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rivera-Lara L, Geocadin R, Zorrilla-Vaca A, et al. Validation of near-infrared spectroscopy for monitoring cerebral autoregulation in comatose patients. Neurocrit Care. 2017;27:362–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ragauskas A, Daubaris G, Petkus V, Ragaisis V, Ursino M. Clinical study of continuous non-invasive cerebrovascular autoregulation monitoring in neurosurgical ICU. Acta Neurochir Suppl. 2005;95:367–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Petkus V, Preiksaitis A, Krakauskaite S, et al. Novel method and device for fully non-invasive cerebrovascular autoregulation monitoring. Electron Electr Eng. 2014;20:24–9.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Petkus V, Ragauskas A, Jurkonis R. Investigation of intracranial media ultrasonic monitoring model. Ultrasonics. 2002;40:829–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Petkus V, Krakauskaite S, Chomskis R, et al. Novel technology of non-invasive cerebrovascular autoregulation monitoring. In: Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE 27th international symposium on computer-based medical systems (CBMS ‘14). Danvers, MA: Copyright Clearance Center, 2014:427–30.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Fantini S, Sassaroli A, Tgavalekos KT, Kornbluth J. Cerebral blood flow and autoregulation: current measurement techniques and prospects for noninvasive optical methods. Neurophotonics. 2016;3:031411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Avezaat CJ, van Eijndhoven JH, Wyper DJ. Cerebrospinal fluid pulse pressure and intracranial volume–pressure relationships. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1979;42:687–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Czosnyka M, Pickard JD. Monitoring and interpretation of intracranial pressure. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2004;75:813–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Budohoski KP, Czosnyka M, de Riva N, et al. The relationship between cerebral blood flow autoregulation and cerebrovascular pressure reactivity after traumatic brain injury. Neurosurgery. 2012;71:652–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Highton D, Ghosh A, Tachtsidis I, Panovska-Griffiths J, Elwell CE, Smith M. Monitoring cerebral autoregulation after brain injury: multimodal assessment of cerebral slow-wave oscillations using near-infrared spectroscopy. Anesth Analg. 2015;121:198–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Zweifel C, Castellani G, Czosnyka M, et al. Noninvasive monitoring of cerebrovascular reactivity with near infrared spectroscopy in head-injured patients. J Neurotrauma. 2010;27:1951–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Scheeren TWL, Saugel B. Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing 2016 end of year summary: monitoring cerebral oxygenation and autoregulation. J Clin Monit Comput. 2017;31:241–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lang EW, Mudaliar Y, Lagopoulos J, et al. A review of cerebral autoregulation. In: Keneally J, ed. Australasian Anaesthesia. Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists. SOS Print and Media Group Sydney, 2005:161–172.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Horsfield MA, Jara JL, Saeed NP, Panerai RB, Robinson TG. Regional differences in dynamic cerebral autoregulation in the healthy brain assessed by magnetic resonance imaging. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e62588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Budohoski KP, Reinhard M, Aries MJH, et al. Monitoring cerebral autoregulation after head injury. Which component of transcranial Doppler flow velocity is optimal? Neurocrit Care. 2012;17:211–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hori D, Brown C, Ono M, et al. Arterial pressure above the upper cerebral autoregulation limit during cardiopulmonary bypass is associated with postoperative delirium. Br J Anaesth. 2014;113:1009–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Lavinio A, Ene-Iordache B, Nodari I, et al. Cerebrovascular reactivity and autonomic drive following traumatic brain injury. Acta Neurochir Suppl. 2008;102:3–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Balestreri M, Czosnyka M, Steiner LA, et al. Association between outcome, cerebral pressure reactivity and slow ICP waves following head injury. Acta Neurochir Suppl. 2005;95:25–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Qiu W, Jiang Q, Xiao G, Wang W, Shen H. Changes in intracranial pressure gradients between the cerebral hemispheres in patients with intracerebral hematomas in one cerebral hemisphere. BMC Anesthesiol. 2014;14:112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Sahuquillo J, Poca MA, Arribas M, Garnacho A, Rubio E. Interhemispheric supratentorial intracranial pressure gradients in head-injured patients: are they clinically important? J Neurosurg. 1999;90:16–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and Neurocritical Care Society 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vytautas Petkus
    • 1
    Email author
  • Aidanas Preiksaitis
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  • Solventa Krakauskaite
    • 1
  • Laimonas Bartusis
    • 1
  • Romanas Chomskis
    • 1
  • Yasin Hamarat
    • 1
  • Erika Zubaviciute
    • 3
    • 4
  • Saulius Vosylius
    • 3
    • 4
  • Saulius Rocka
    • 3
    • 4
  • Arminas Ragauskas
    • 1
  1. 1.Health Telematics Science InstituteKaunas University of TechnologyKaunasLithuania
  2. 2.Department of Neurology, Academy of MedicineLithuanian University of Health SciencesKaunasLithuania
  3. 3.Clinic of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Faculty of MedicineVilnius UniversityVilniusLithuania
  4. 4.Department of NeurosurgeryRepublic Vilnius University HospitalVilniusLithuania

Personalised recommendations