Early and late clinical outcomes after decompressive craniectomy for traumatic refractory intracranial hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis of current evidence

Problematic meta-analyses: Bayesian and frequentist perspectives on combining randomized controlled trials and non-randomized studies

PURPOSE

In the literature, the propriety of the meta-analytic treatment-effect produced by combining randomized controlled trials (RCT) and non-randomized studies (NRS) is questioned, given the inherent confounding in NRS that may bias the meta-analysis. The current study compared an implicitly principled pooled Bayesian meta-analytic treatment-effect with that of frequentist pooling of RCT and NRS to determine how well each approach handled the NRS bias.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Binary outcome Critical-Care meta-analyses, reflecting the importance of such outcomes in Critical-Care practice, combining RCT and NRS were identified electronically. Bayesian pooled treatment-effect and 95% credible-intervals (BCrI), posterior model probabilities indicating model plausibility and Bayes-factors (BF) were estimated using an informative heavy-tailed heterogeneity prior (half-Cauchy). Preference for pooling of RCT and NRS was indicated for Bayes-factors > 3 or < 0.333 for the converse. All pooled frequentist treatment-effects and 95% confidence intervals (FCI) were re-estimated using the popular DerSimonian-Laird (DSL) random effects model.

RESULTS

Fifty meta-analyses were identified (2009-2021), reporting pooled estimates in 44; 29 were pharmaceutical-therapeutic and 21 were non-pharmaceutical therapeutic. Re-computed pooled DSL FCI excluded the null (OR or RR = 1) in 86% (43/50). In 18 meta-analyses there was an agreement between FCI and BCrI in excluding the null. In 23 meta-analyses where FCI excluded the null, BCrI embraced the null. BF supported a pooled model in 27 meta-analyses and separate models in 4. The highest density of the posterior model probabilities for 0.333 < Bayes factor < 1 was 0.8.

CONCLUSIONS

In the current meta-analytic cohort, an integrated and multifaceted Bayesian approach gave support to including NRS in a pooled-estimate model. Conversely, caution should attend the reporting of naïve frequentist pooled, RCT and NRS, meta-analytic treatment effects.

Pharmacological Modulation and (Patho)Physiological Roles of TRPM4 Channel-Part 2: TRPM4 in Health and Disease

Transient receptor potential melastatin 4 (TRPM4) is a unique member of the TRPM protein family and, similarly to TRPM5, is Ca²⁺ sensitive and permeable for monovalent but not divalent cations. It is widely expressed in many organs and is involved in several functions; it regulates membrane potential and Ca²⁺ homeostasis in both excitable and non-excitable cells. This part of the review discusses the currently available knowledge about the physiological and pathophysiological roles of TRPM4 in various tissues. These include the physiological functions of TRPM4 in the cells of the Langerhans islets of the pancreas, in various immune functions, in the regulation of vascular tone, in respiratory and other neuronal activities, in chemosensation, and in renal and cardiac physiology. TRPM4 contributes to pathological conditions such as overactive bladder, endothelial dysfunction, various types of malignant diseases and central nervous system conditions including stroke and injuries as well as in cardiac conditions such as arrhythmias, hypertrophy, and ischemia-reperfusion injuries. TRPM4 claims more and more attention and is likely to be the topic of research in the future.

Escalate and De-Escalate Therapies for Intracranial Pressure Control in Traumatic Brain Injury

Severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) is frequently associated with an elevation of intracranial pressure (ICP), followed by cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) reduction. Invasive monitoring of ICP is recommended to guide a step-by-step “staircase approach” which aims to normalize ICP values and reduce the risks of secondary damage. However, if such monitoring is not available clinical examination and radiological criteria should be used. A major concern is how to taper the therapies employed for ICP control. The aim of this manuscript is to review the criteria for escalating and withdrawing therapies in TBI patients. Each step of the staircase approach carries a risk of adverse effects related to the duration of treatment. Tapering of barbiturates should start once ICP control has been achieved for at least 24 h, although a period of 2–12 days is often required. Administration of hyperosmolar fluids should be avoided if ICP is normal. Sedation should be reduced after at least 24 h of controlled ICP to allow neurological examination. Removal of invasive ICP monitoring is suggested after 72 h of normal ICP. For patients who have undergone surgical decompression, cranioplasty represents the final step, and an earlier cranioplasty (15–90 days after decompression) seems to reduce the rate of infection, seizures, and hydrocephalus.

Escalation therapy in severe traumatic brain injury: how long is intracranial pressure monitoring necessary?

Traumatic brain injury frequently causes an elevation of intracranial pressure (ICP) that could lead to reduction of cerebral perfusion pressure and cause brain ischemia. Invasive ICP monitoring is recommended by international guidelines, in order to reduce the incidence of secondary brain injury; although rare, the complications related to ICP probes could be dependent on the duration of monitoring. The aim of this manuscript is to clarify the appropriate timing for removal and management of invasive ICP monitoring, in order to reduce the risk of related complications and guarantee adequate cerebral autoregulatory control. There is no universal consensus concerning the duration of invasive ICP monitoring and its related complications, although the pertinent literature seems to show that the longer is the monitoring maintenance, the higher is the risk of technical issues. Besides, upon 72 h of normal ICP values or less than 72 h if the first computed tomography scan is normal (none or minimal signs of injury) and the neurological exam is available (allowing to observe variations and possible occurrence of new-onset pathological response), the removal of invasive ICP monitoring can be justified. The availability of non-invasive monitoring systems should be considered to follow up patients' clinical course after invasive ICP probe removal or for substituting the invasive monitoring in case of contraindication to its placement. Recently, optic nerve sheath diameter and straight sinus systolic flow velocity evaluation through ultrasound methods showed a good correlation with ICP values, demonstrating their potential role in place of invasive monitoring or in the early weaning phase from the invasive ICP monitoring.

Decompressive craniectomy for the treatment of high intracranial pressure in closed traumatic brain injury

BACKGROUND

High intracranial pressure (ICP) is the most frequent cause of death and disability after severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). It is usually treated with general maneuvers (normothermia, sedation, etc.) and a set of first-line therapeutic measures (moderate hypocapnia, mannitol, etc.). When these measures fail, second-line therapies are initiated, which include: barbiturates, hyperventilation, moderate hypothermia, or removal of a variable amount of skull bone (secondary decompressive craniectomy).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of secondary decompressive craniectomy (DC) on outcomes of patients with severe TBI in whom conventional medical therapeutic measures have failed to control raised ICP.

SEARCH METHODS

The most recent search was run on 8 December 2019. We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialised Register, CENTRAL (Cochrane Library), Ovid MEDLINE(R), Ovid MEDLINE(R) In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE(R) Daily and Ovid OLDMEDLINE(R), Embase Classic + Embase (OvidSP) and ISI Web of Science (SCI-EXPANDED & CPCI-S). We also searched trials registries and contacted experts.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized studies assessing patients over the age of 12 months with severe TBI who either underwent DC to control ICP refractory to conventional medical treatments or received standard care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We selected potentially relevant studies from the search results, and obtained study reports. Two review authors independently extracted data from included studies and assessed risk of bias. We used a random-effects model for meta-analysis. We rated the quality of the evidence according to the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three trials (590 participants). One single-site trial included 27 children; another multicenter trial (three countries) recruited 155 adults, the third trial was conducted in 24 countries, and recruited 408 adolescents and adults. Each study compared DC combined with standard care (this could include induced barbiturate coma or cooling of the brain, or both). All trials measured outcomes up to six months after injury; one also measured outcomes at 12 and 24 months (the latter data remain unpublished). All trials were at a high risk of bias for the criterion of performance bias, as neither participants nor personnel could be blinded to these interventions. The pediatric trial was at a high risk of selection bias and stopped early; another trial was at risk of bias because of atypical inclusion criteria and a change to the primary outcome after it had started. Mortality: pooled results for three studies provided moderate quality evidence that risk of death at six months was slightly reduced with DC (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.01; 3 studies, 571 participants; I² = 38%; moderate-quality evidence), and one study also showed a clear reduction in risk of death at 12 months (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.76; 1 study, 373 participants; high-quality evidence). Neurological outcome: conscious of controversy around the traditional dichotomization of the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) scale, we chose to present results in three ways, in order to contextualize factors relevant to clinical/patient decision-making. First, we present results of death in combination with vegetative status, versus other outcomes. Two studies reported results at six months for 544 participants. One employed a lower ICP threshold than the other studies, and showed an increase in the risk of death/vegetative state for the DC group. The other study used a more conventional ICP threshold, and results favoured the DC group (15.7% absolute risk reduction (ARR) (95% CI 6% to 25%). The number needed to treat for one beneficial outcome (NNTB) (i.e. to avoid death or vegetative status) was seven. The pooled result for DC compared with standard care showed no clear benefit for either group (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.46 to 2.13; 2 studies, 544 participants; I² = 86%; low-quality evidence). One study reported data for this outcome at 12 months, when the risk for death or vegetative state was clearly reduced by DC compared with medical treatment (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.86; 1 study, 373 participants; high-quality evidence). Second, we assessed the risk of an 'unfavorable outcome' evaluated on a non-traditional dichotomized GOS-Extended scale (GOS-E), that is, grouping the category 'upper severe disability' into the 'good outcome' grouping. Data were available for two studies (n = 571). Pooling indicated little difference between DC and standard care regarding the risk of an unfavorable outcome at six months following injury (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.63; 544 participants); heterogeneity was high, with an I² value of 82%. One trial reported data at 12 months and indicated a clear benefit of DC (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.95; 373 participants). Third, we assessed the risk of an 'unfavorable outcome' using the (traditional) dichotomized GOS/GOS-E cutoff into 'favorable' versus 'unfavorable' results. There was little difference between DC and standard care at six months (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.40; 3 studies, 571 participants; low-quality evidence), and heterogeneity was high (I² = 78%). At 12 months one trial suggested a similar finding (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.09; 1 study, 373 participants; high-quality evidence). With regard to ICP reduction, pooled results for two studies provided moderate quality evidence that DC was superior to standard care for reducing ICP within 48 hours (MD -4.66 mmHg, 95% CI -6.86 to -2.45; 2 studies, 182 participants; I² = 0%). Data from the third study were consistent with these, but could not be pooled. Data on adverse events are difficult to interpret, as mortality and complications are high, and it can be difficult to distinguish between treatment-related adverse events and the natural evolution of the condition. In general, there was low-quality evidence that surgical patients experienced a higher risk of adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Decompressive craniectomy holds promise of reduced mortality, but the effects of long-term neurological outcome remain controversial, and involve an examination of the priorities of participants and their families. Future research should focus on identifying clinical and neuroimaging characteristics to identify those patients who would survive with an acceptable quality of life; the best timing for DC; the most appropriate surgical techniques; and whether some synergistic treatments used with DC might improve patient outcomes.

BIIB093 (IV glibenclamide): an investigational compound for the prevention and treatment of severe cerebral edema

Introduction: Brain swelling due to edema formation is a major cause of neurological deterioration and death in patients with large hemispheric infarction (LHI) and severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), especially contusion-TBI. Preclinical studies have shown that SUR1-TRPM4 channels play a critical role in edema formation and brain swelling in LHI and TBI. Glibenclamide, a sulfonylurea drug and potent inhibitor of SUR1-TRPM4, was reformulated for intravenous injection, known as BIIB093.Areas covered: We discuss the findings from Phase 2 clinical trials of BIIB093 in patients with LHI (GAMES-Pilot and GAMES-RP) and from a small Phase 2 clinical trial in patients with TBI. For the GAMES trials, we review data on objective biological variables, adjudicated edema-related endpoints, functional outcomes, and mortality which, despite missing the primary endpoint, supported the initiation of a Phase 3 trial in LHI (CHARM). For the TBI trial, we review data on MRI measures of edema and the initiation of a Phase 2 trial in contusion-TBI (ASTRAL).Expert opinion: Emerging clinical data show that BIIB093 has the potential to transform our management of patients with LHI, contusion-TBI and other conditions in which swelling leads to neurological deterioration and death.