Attitudes to intracranial pressure monitoring of traumatic intracerebral haemorrhage.

Introduction: Recent research has been equivocal regarding the usefulness of intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring for traumatic intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH). We aimed to investigate attitudes of clinicians from as wide an international audience as possible.

Materials And Methods: A SurveyMonkey(®) questionnaire was distributed to individuals, including members of the Society of British Neurological Surgeons, the European Brain Injury Consortium, the neurotrauma committee of the Euroacademia Multidisciplinaria Neurotraumatologica and the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies.

Results: N = 98 completed the survey (surgeons n = 86) from at least 25 different countries. ICP was routinely monitored by 76% and would be monitored by 5% more if they had equipment. ICP monitoring was valued (0 = not at all important, 10 = critically important) as 10 by 21% (median = 8, Q1 = 7, Q3 = 9). Triggers to begin ICP monitoring included midline shift (n = 48), contusion (n = 47), ICH (n = 46), subdural haemorrhage (n = 42), Glasgow coma scale reduction of median 2 for eye, verbal or motor, and one reactive pupil (30%). Responders stated that intervention would begin for adults with an ICP median of 25 mmHg and for children 20 mmHg. Most favourable treatments of raised ICP included Mannitol and ventriculostomy, which were ranked as most favourable (out of 10) by n = 31 each. Responders claimed to be aware of 16 different trials that investigated the value of ICP monitoring in neurotrauma, including BEST TRIP (n = 35), Rescue ICP (n = 13) and DECRA (n = 8).

Conclusion: ICP monitoring continues to be a highly valued and clinically desirable technique for managing traumatic ICH patients.