Traumatic Brain INjurymonTBINCT02993549
TBI Multimodal Monitoring Study
An observational study of Traumatic Brain INjury and Microdialysis, run by University of Cambridge at 1 site in United Kingdom.
Trial summary
Head injury is a common and devastating condition that can affect people at any stage of their lives. The treatment of severe head injury takes place in intensive care where interventions are designed to protect the brain from further injury and provide the best environment for recovery. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 65 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Traumatic Brain INjury, Microdialysis
- How many people
- 100 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited Kingdom
- Study dates
- 16 Sep 2017to Oct 2022
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 65 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: Patients suffering from traumatic brain injury in need of intracranial monitoring admitted to the neuro-critical care unit at Addenbrooke's hospital, Cambridge, England.
Who may be able to join
- Patients with head injury requiring ICP monitoring
- Age 18-65 years
- Abnormal CT scan
Who cannot join
- Bilateral fixed and dilated pupils
- Bleeding diathesis
- Thrombocytopenia (platelets < 100)
- Devastating injuries; patient not expected to survive > 24 hours
- Brainstem damage
- Pregnancy
- Involvement in other studies non-observational studies
- MD catheter located in haemorrhagic lesion
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United Kingdom1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Cambridge University Hospital NHS Trust
Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, CB2 0QQ
Adel Helmy
About this study
Official title: Multimodality Monitoring Directed Management of Patients Suffering From Traumatic Brain Injury
Head injury is a common and devastating condition that can affect people at any stage of their lives. The treatment of severe head injury takes place in intensive care where interventions are designed to protect the brain from further injury and provide the best environment for recovery. A number of different monitors are used after head injury, including a monitor called microdialysis, to measure how the brain is generating energy. Abnormalities in these monitors guide doctors to the right treatments when the brain is at risk of further injury. There are lots of ways that the brain can be injured further after head injury such as raised pressure in the skull from brain swelling, low oxygen levels and low glucose levels. In this study we aim to combine information from all of these monitors to figure out what the underlying problem is and choose the right intervention to treat the problem that is affecting the patient at the time and compare this with previous treatment protocols to see if it improved outcome.
Aim:
To establish and validate a protocol to treat abnormalities in a microdialysis measure called lactate/pyruvate ratio (LPR) that reflects how cells are generating energy, and compare it with patient cohorts not being monitored using the current protocol.
Read the detailed description
Background:
Traumatic brain injury (TBI, "head injury) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide (Hyder et al., 2007). During the first four decades of life, trauma is the leading cause of death and TBI is involved in at least half the number of cases (Jennett, 1996). In the UK, 1,500 per 100,000 of the population (total 1 million) attend Accident and Emergency Departments with a head injury per year. Of these, around 135,000 people are admitted each year and there are an estimated 500,000 people (aged 16 - 74) with long term disabilities as a direct result of TBI (Headway, 2016). Approximately 10 per 100,000 per year die from head injury (Jennett and MacMillan, 1981, Hutchinson et al., 1998).
The major determinant of outcome from TBI is the severity of the primary injury, which is irreversible. However, primary injury invariably leads to the activation of cellular and molecular cascades which mediate further secondary injury that evolve over the ensuing hours and days (Masel and DeWitt, 2010) and are therefore amenable to therapeutic intervention. These molecular cascades can lead to brain swelling within the confines of a fixed intracranial compartment, leading to increased intracranial pressure (ICP) and compromising cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) (Werner and Engelhard, 2007). The control of ICP and maintenance of CPP has been the bedrock of neurointensive care management of TBI for several decades, however, a recent multicenter randomised clinical trial could not show a long-term favorable outcome with ICP guided therapy (Carney et al., 2012).
The Neuro Critical Care Unit (NCCU) in Cambridge is a world leader in TBI monitoring and routinely employs multi-modal monitoring comprising of ICP, brain tissue oxygen and microdialysis monitoring, in every TBI patient. Conceptually, microdialysis monitoring is an attractive method of assessing tissue biochemistry as it provides a direct measure of metabolic substrates at the cellular level at which energy failure occurs. Specifically, the microdialysis derived measure Lactate/Pyruvate Ratio (LPR) is a measure of cellular redox state and therefore the balance between aerobic and anaerobic metabolism. To date, studies in the literature have focused on demonstrating that individual monitoring parameters e.g. microdialysis derived LPR>25 correlate with an unfavorable outcome in multivariate analyses (Sarrafzadeh et al., 2000, Timofeev et al., 2011).
One reason that an ICP monitoring trial has not been proven to deliver improved outcome is that there are several alternative routes to neuronal injury include insufficient oxygen delivery (Nortje and Gupta, 2006), diffusion barrier within tissues (Smielewski et al., 2002), tissue hypoglycaemia (Vespa et al., 2003) and mitochondrial dysfunction (Verweij et al., 2000). Our understanding of these pathophysiological mechanisms has been greatly advanced by the use of multi-modality monitoring including direct measurement of brain tissue oxygen and cerebral microdialysis. In theory, these pathophysiological states could be treated using treatment of ICP lowering therapy, augmenting cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP), increasing oxygen delivery and augmenting glucose delivery. Though, we currently don't know the best way to combine these treatments and they are often used together making independent analysis difficult. Moreover, there is currently no approved therapy for mitochondrial dysfunction, and while some claim that mitochondrial dysfunction is imminent in increased LPR (Nordstrom et al., 2016), the reality is more complex as there will be conditions that are treatable with an increased LPR, but these states need to be better established for clinicians in order to accurately guide treatment (Lazaridis and Robertson, 2016). Previous implementations of guidelines in TBI have shown to improve care and reduce health related cost, something we hope to achieve with our established clinical protocol (Faul et al., 2007).
Overall research design
We propose a treatment algorithm exploring how a standardised clinical protocol that incorporates multi-modality monitoring parameters (intracranial pressure, brain tissue oxygen and microdialysis parameters) can be systematically and rigorously applied in a traumatic brain injury (TBI) patient cohort with deranged brain chemistry (LPR >25).
Our principal outcome metric is the ability for the protocol to improve the LPR, as well as to see how many patients that may be stratified into any of the suggest treatment categories (see below).
Interventions and assessments
Following inclusion, patients will be monitored using the standard clinical monitoring for sedated and ventilated TBI patients which includes an Intracranial Pressure (ICP) monitor device, a brain tissue oxygen monitor (PbO2) and microdialysis to assess brain biochemistry (Le Roux et al., 2014, Hutchinson et al., 2015). While ICP and PbO2 are measured continually, microdialysis samples are measured hourly. If a derangement in LPR is identified (LPR>25), patients will have an increase in monitoring frequency to every 30 minutes. Our primary measure of deranged energy generation at the cellular level is a LPR>25. This threshold has been shown to relate to an unfavourable long-term outcome (Timofeev et al., 2011, Stein et al., 2012). If the LPR>25 on two consecutive samples (to avoid spurious or transient derangements) it will trigger specific treatment strategies depending on the other contemporaneous monitoring modalities. After each intervention, two consecutive microdialysis samples will be taken to confirm whether LPR has been corrected or whether a further step in the protocol needs to be taken. The sequence of interventions has been chosen on the basis of the strength of association of each intervention with LPR in the existing literature (Hutchinson et al., 2015).
STAGE 1: Correction of Intracranial Hypertension; ICP corrected to <20mmHg Raised ICP compromises delivery of both substrate and oxygen to the injured brain, by reducing Cerebral Perfusion Pressure) and is in itself an independent predictor of poor outcome (Marmarou et al., 1991, Bratton et al., 2007b). In the acute setting we will use hypertonic saline (100ml 5% saline by central venous bolus) as a rapid means of reducing ICP (Marko, 2012). This will be followed by an escalation of ICP control measures using our established ICP protocol (Helmy et al., 2007).
STAGE 2: Ensure sufficient Oxygenation; increase PbO2>15mmHg
Increased LPR can reflect ischaemia and in the first instance we will ensure that there is adequate oxygenation by increasing the PbO2>15mmHg. This threshold of PbO2 has been recognised as physiological in the literature (van den Brink et al., 2000). There are two possible limitations to oxygen availability to brain tissue recognised in TBI:
- Inadequate oxygen delivery (DO2(brain)=Cerebral Blood Flow (CBF) x Oxygen Capacity in Blood) Firstly, we will ensure adequate haemoglobin concentration (>8g/dl) within the blood and normovolemia to ensure adequate oxygen carrying capacity. Cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) is monitored as a surrogate of CBF and is usually maintained at around 60-80 mmHg using vasopressors in the NCCU. The CPP target will be based on the autoregulatory parameters of the individual patient utilising ICM+ software. The pressure reactivity index (PRx), is a measure of the ability of the cerebral vasculature to autoregulate to differing CPP (Czosnyka et al., 1997). Keeping the patient's CPP in this autoregulatory range has been show in observational studies to improve outcome (Aries et al., 2012, Needham et al., 2016). If the PRx is >0.3, we will increase the CPP by 10-20 mmHg (to a maximum of 80mmHg as per the upper threshold suggested in the BTF guidelines) (Bratton et al., 2007a).
- Diffusion Barrier Even with adequate oxygen delivery, microcirculatory collapse at the capillary level can lead to tissue hypoxia (Menon et al., 2004). In this circumstance, increasing the partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood (PaO2) can increase the gradient between oxygen within the blood and the brain tissue and drive oxygen into the tissues (Reinert et al., 2003). This will be achieved by increasing the fractional inspired oxygen (FiO2) by 40% to a maximum FiO2 of 80%.
STAGE 3: Ensure adequate metabolic substrate delivery; increase brain glucose >1.0 mmol/L Glucose is the primary biochemical substrate in order to generate pyruvate through glycolysis. Brain tissue hypoglycaemia, measured using microdialysis, has been shown to be common following TBI, and is correlated with an unfavourable outcome (Stein et al., 2012). If brain tissue glucose levels falls <1.0 mmol/L, we will increase plasma glucose to 7-10 mmol/L, as lower levels have been shown to correlate to brain tissue hypoglacemia (Oddo et al., 2008), using 50% dextrose. Glucose manipulation has previously been demonstrated to improve LPR (Oddo et al., 2008).
STAGE 4: Persistent LPR>25 despite all monitoring modalities normalized; consider mitochondrial dysfunction The mitochondria are the site of oxidative phosphorylation within cells generating Adenine-Tri-Phosphate (ATP) in the presence of oxygen and suitable biochemical substrate (typically pyruvate) in the tricarboxylic acid (TCA) cycle. It has been empirically demonstrated that following TBI, even in the presence of adequate oxygenation and glucose the mitochondria are incapable of utilising these substrates for energy generation(Verweij et al., 2000). In this circumstance, limited amounts of ATP are generated through anaerobic pathways generating lactate as a byproduct, thus increasing the LPR. In this case, LP ratio is increased, but with an a normal pyruvate concentration (>70mmol/l). In this circumstance there are no accepted pharmacological therapies although in the literature both succinate, a component of the tricarboxcylic acid cycle (Ehinger et al., 2016), and Cyclosporin A, a calcineurin inhibitor, (Mbye et al., 2009) have shown potential efficacy against mitochondrial dysfunction, and Cyclosporin A has a proven safety profile in TBI patients (Mazzeo et al., 2009). It will be up to the treating physician to decide if they wish to consider novel neuroprotective agents or metabolic substrates that have shown promising results in the treatment of mitochondrial dysfunction.
Sampling strategies and data collection
Multimodality monitoring parameters are collected in the neuro-critical care unit (NCCU) in real time, including ICP, CPP (PRx) and PbO2 as well as potential treatments provided. Microdialysis parameters, including the brain metabolites glucose, pyruvate, lactate, glycerol and glutamate, will be sampled every 30 minutes by research nurses in the NCCU. When intracranial monitoring is not deemed necessary anymore, it will be discontinued as per conventional management. The number of interventions that the patient receives and any deviation from the protocol will be recorded.
- Conditions
- Traumatic Brain INjury, Microdialysis
- Medical subject headings
- Brain Injuries, Traumatic
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
LPR <25
Decrease of lactate:pyruvate ratio to below 25
Measured: During neuro-critical care (the first 10 days following trauma).
Different pathological targets
How many patients have the different pathological targets, including 1. Intracranial hypertension (LPR corrected if ICP <20mmHg), 2. Delivery failure (if LPR is corrected when PbO2 is improved and CPP increased). 3.Oxygen Diffusion Barrier (LPR is corrected if PbO2 is increased through FiO2 increase). 4. Neuroglycopenia (LPR is corrected if brain glucose is increased) or 5. Mitochondrial dysfunction (LPR remains increased despite all the therapies applied).
Measured: During the neuro-critical care period (first 10 days after trauma)
Secondary outcomes (4)
Monitoring correlation
Correlation between Microdialysis parameters (glucose (mmol/L), lactate (mmol/L), pyruvate (mmol/L) and glutamate (µmol/L)) and PbO2 (mmHg), ICP (mmHg) and CPP (mmHg)
Measured: During the neuro-critical care period (first 10 days after trauma)
Functional Outcome
extended Glasgow Outcome Score 6 months following trauma assessed in the outpatient clinic at Addenbrooke's Hospital. Comparison between patients in different pathological targets.
Measured: 6 months following injury
Cytokine concentration in MD
Amount of cytokine concentration in microdialysis sample. Comparison between patients in different pathological targets.
Measured: During the neuro-critical care period (first 10 days after trauma)
Biomarker concentration in serum
Amount of S100B concentration (µg/L) through serum samples taken twice daily in the neuro-critical care unit. Comparison between patients in different pathological targets.
Measured: During the neuro-critical care (first 10 days after trauma)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted15 Dec 2016 (estimated)
- Study start16 Sep 2017
- Primary completionJan 2022 (estimated)
- Study completionOct 2022 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (17)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Traumatic Brain INjuryStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Cambridge
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Adel Helmy, University of Cambridge
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02993549
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- A094233
- Acronym
- monTBI
- Status last verified
- Jul 2020
- First submitted
- 7 Dec 2016
- Last updated
- 14 Jul 2020
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
Hyder AA, Wunderlich CA, Puvanachandra P, Gururaj G, Kobusingye OC. The impact of traumatic brain injuries: a global perspective. NeuroRehabilitation. 2007;22(5):341-53.
PubMed 18162698Jennett B. Epidemiology of head injury. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1996 Apr;60(4):362-9. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.60.4.362. No abstract available.
PubMed 8774396Jennett B, MacMillan R. Epidemiology of head injury. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1981 Jan 10;282(6258):101-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.282.6258.101.
PubMed 6779889Hutchinson PJ, Kirkpatrick PJ, Addison J, Jackson S, Pickard JD. The management of minor traumatic brain injury. J Accid Emerg Med. 1998 Mar;15(2):84-8. doi: 10.1136/emj.15.2.84.
PubMed 9570046Masel BE, DeWitt DS. Traumatic brain injury: a disease process, not an event. J Neurotrauma. 2010 Aug;27(8):1529-40. doi: 10.1089/neu.2010.1358.
PubMed 20504161Werner C, Engelhard K. Pathophysiology of traumatic brain injury. Br J Anaesth. 2007 Jul;99(1):4-9. doi: 10.1093/bja/aem131.
PubMed 17573392Carney N, Lujan S, Dikmen S, Temkin N, Petroni G, Pridgeon J, Barber J, Machamer J, Cherner M, Chaddock K, Hendrix T, Rondina C, Videtta W, Celix JM, Chesnut R. Intracranial pressure monitoring in severe traumatic brain injury in latin america: process and methods for a multi-center randomized controlled trial. J Neurotrauma. 2012 Jul 20;29(11):2022-9. doi: 10.1089/neu.2011.2019. Epub 2012 May 15.
PubMed 22435793Timofeev I, Carpenter KL, Nortje J, Al-Rawi PG, O'Connell MT, Czosnyka M, Smielewski P, Pickard JD, Menon DK, Kirkpatrick PJ, Gupta AK, Hutchinson PJ. Cerebral extracellular chemistry and outcome following traumatic brain injury: a microdialysis study of 223 patients. Brain. 2011 Feb;134(Pt 2):484-94. doi: 10.1093/brain/awq353. Epub 2011 Jan 18.
PubMed 21247930Sarrafzadeh AS, Sakowitz OW, Callsen TA, Lanksch WR, Unterberg AW. Bedside microdialysis for early detection of cerebral hypoxia in traumatic brain injury. Neurosurg Focus. 2000 Nov 15;9(5):e2. doi: 10.3171/foc.2000.9.5.2.
PubMed 16821754Nortje J, Gupta AK. The role of tissue oxygen monitoring in patients with acute brain injury. Br J Anaesth. 2006 Jul;97(1):95-106. doi: 10.1093/bja/ael137. Epub 2006 Jun 3.
PubMed 16751641Smielewski P, Coles JP, Fryer TD, Minhas PS, Menon DK, Pickard JD. Integrated image analysis solutions for PET datasets in damaged brain. J Clin Monit Comput. 2002 Dec;17(7-8):427-40. doi: 10.1023/a:1026293611455.
PubMed 14650638Vespa PM, McArthur D, O'Phelan K, Glenn T, Etchepare M, Kelly D, Bergsneider M, Martin NA, Hovda DA. Persistently low extracellular glucose correlates with poor outcome 6 months after human traumatic brain injury despite a lack of increased lactate: a microdialysis study. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2003 Jul;23(7):865-77. doi: 10.1097/01.WCB.0000076701.45782.EF.
PubMed 12843790Verweij BH, Muizelaar JP, Vinas FC, Peterson PL, Xiong Y, Lee CP. Impaired cerebral mitochondrial function after traumatic brain injury in humans. J Neurosurg. 2000 Nov;93(5):815-20. doi: 10.3171/jns.2000.93.5.0815.
PubMed 11059663Nordstrom CH, Nielsen TH, Schalen W, Reinstrup P, Ungerstedt U. Biochemical indications of cerebral ischaemia and mitochondrial dysfunction in severe brain trauma analysed with regard to type of lesion. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2016 Jul;158(7):1231-40. doi: 10.1007/s00701-016-2835-z. Epub 2016 May 17.
PubMed 27188288Lazaridis C, Robertson CS. The Role of Multimodal Invasive Monitoring in Acute Traumatic Brain Injury. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2016 Oct;27(4):509-17. doi: 10.1016/j.nec.2016.05.010.
PubMed 27637400
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 14 Jul 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Multimodality Monitoring Directed Management of Patients Suffering From Traumatic Brain Injury
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02993549
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- monTBI / A094233
- Conditions
- Traumatic Brain INjury, Microdialysis
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- University of CambridgeUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
- Study start
- 16 Sep 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Jan 2022 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Oct 2022 (estimated)
- First posted
- 15 Dec 2016 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Head injury is a common and devastating condition that can affect people at any stage of their lives. The treatment of severe head injury takes place in intensive care where interventions are designed to protect the brain from further injury and provide the best environment for recovery. A number of different monitors are used after head injury, including a monitor called microdialysis, to measure how the brain is generating energy. Abnormalities in these monitors guide doctors to the right treatments when the brain is at risk of further injury. There are lots of ways that the brain can be injured further after head injury such as raised pressure in the skull from brain swelling, low oxygen levels and low glucose levels. In this study we aim to combine information from all of these monitors to figure out what the underlying problem is and choose the right intervention to treat the problem that is affecting the patient at the time and compare this with previous treatment protocols to see if it improved outcome.
Aim:
To establish and validate a protocol to treat abnormalities in a microdialysis measure called lactate/pyruvate ratio (LPR) that reflects how cells are generating energy, and compare it with patient cohorts not being monitored using the current protocol.
Detailed description
Background:
Traumatic brain injury (TBI, "head injury) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide (Hyder et al., 2007). During the first four decades of life, trauma is the leading cause of death and TBI is involved in at least half the number of cases (Jennett, 1996). In the UK, 1,500 per 100,000 of the population (total 1 million) attend Accident and Emergency Departments with a head injury per year. Of these, around 135,000 people are admitted each year and there are an estimated 500,000 people (aged 16 - 74) with long term disabilities as a direct result of TBI (Headway, 2016). Approximately 10 per 100,000 per year die from head injury (Jennett and MacMillan, 1981, Hutchinson et al., 1998).
The major determinant of outcome from TBI is the severity of the primary injury, which is irreversible. However, primary injury invariably leads to the activation of cellular and molecular cascades which mediate further secondary injury that evolve over the ensuing hours and days (Masel and DeWitt, 2010) and are therefore amenable to therapeutic intervention. These molecular cascades can lead to brain swelling within the confines of a fixed intracranial compartment, leading to increased intracranial pressure (ICP) and compromising cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) (Werner and Engelhard, 2007). The control of ICP and maintenance of CPP has been the bedrock of neurointensive care management of TBI for several decades, however, a recent multicenter randomised clinical trial could not show a long-term favorable outcome with ICP guided therapy (Carney et al., 2012).
The Neuro Critical Care Unit (NCCU) in Cambridge is a world leader in TBI monitoring and routinely employs multi-modal monitoring comprising of ICP, brain tissue oxygen and microdialysis monitoring, in every TBI patient. Conceptually, microdialysis monitoring is an attractive method of assessing tissue biochemistry as it provides a direct measure of metabolic substrates at the cellular level at which energy failure occurs. Specifically, the microdialysis derived measure Lactate/Pyruvate Ratio (LPR) is a measure of cellular redox state and therefore the balance between aerobic and anaerobic metabolism. To date, studies in the literature have focused on demonstrating that individual monitoring parameters e.g. microdialysis derived LPR>25 correlate with an unfavorable outcome in multivariate analyses (Sarrafzadeh et al., 2000, Timofeev et al., 2011).
One reason that an ICP monitoring trial has not been proven to deliver improved outcome is that there are several alternative routes to neuronal injury include insufficient oxygen delivery (Nortje and Gupta, 2006), diffusion barrier within tissues (Smielewski et al., 2002), tissue hypoglycaemia (Vespa et al., 2003) and mitochondrial dysfunction (Verweij et al., 2000). Our understanding of these pathophysiological mechanisms has been greatly advanced by the use of multi-modality monitoring including direct measurement of brain tissue oxygen and cerebral microdialysis. In theory, these pathophysiological states could be treated using treatment of ICP lowering therapy, augmenting cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP), increasing oxygen delivery and augmenting glucose delivery. Though, we currently don't know the best way to combine these treatments and they are often used together making independent analysis difficult. Moreover, there is currently no approved therapy for mitochondrial dysfunction, and while some claim that mitochondrial dysfunction is imminent in increased LPR (Nordstrom et al., 2016), the reality is more complex as there will be conditions that are treatable with an increased LPR, but these states need to be better established for clinicians in order to accurately guide treatment (Lazaridis and Robertson, 2016). Previous implementations of guidelines in TBI have shown to improve care and reduce health related cost, something we hope to achieve with our established clinical protocol (Faul et al., 2007).
Overall research design
We propose a treatment algorithm exploring how a standardised clinical protocol that incorporates multi-modality monitoring parameters (intracranial pressure, brain tissue oxygen and microdialysis parameters) can be systematically and rigorously applied in a traumatic brain injury (TBI) patient cohort with deranged brain chemistry (LPR >25).
Our principal outcome metric is the ability for the protocol to improve the LPR, as well as to see how many patients that may be stratified into any of the suggest treatment categories (see below).
Interventions and assessments
Following inclusion, patients will be monitored using the standard clinical monitoring for sedated and ventilated TBI patients which includes an Intracranial Pressure (ICP) monitor device, a brain tissue oxygen monitor (PbO2) and microdialysis to assess brain biochemistry (Le Roux et al., 2014, Hutchinson et al., 2015). While ICP and PbO2 are measured continually, microdialysis samples are measured hourly. If a derangement in LPR is identified (LPR>25), patients will have an increase in monitoring frequency to every 30 minutes. Our primary measure of deranged energy generation at the cellular level is a LPR>25. This threshold has been shown to relate to an unfavourable long-term outcome (Timofeev et al., 2011, Stein et al., 2012). If the LPR>25 on two consecutive samples (to avoid spurious or transient derangements) it will trigger specific treatment strategies depending on the other contemporaneous monitoring modalities. After each intervention, two consecutive microdialysis samples will be taken to confirm whether LPR has been corrected or whether a further step in the protocol needs to be taken. The sequence of interventions has been chosen on the basis of the strength of association of each intervention with LPR in the existing literature (Hutchinson et al., 2015).
STAGE 1: Correction of Intracranial Hypertension; ICP corrected to <20mmHg Raised ICP compromises delivery of both substrate and oxygen to the injured brain, by reducing Cerebral Perfusion Pressure) and is in itself an independent predictor of poor outcome (Marmarou et al., 1991, Bratton et al., 2007b). In the acute setting we will use hypertonic saline (100ml 5% saline by central venous bolus) as a rapid means of reducing ICP (Marko, 2012). This will be followed by an escalation of ICP control measures using our established ICP protocol (Helmy et al., 2007).
STAGE 2: Ensure sufficient Oxygenation; increase PbO2>15mmHg
Increased LPR can reflect ischaemia and in the first instance we will ensure that there is adequate oxygenation by increasing the PbO2>15mmHg. This threshold of PbO2 has been recognised as physiological in the literature (van den Brink et al., 2000). There are two possible limitations to oxygen availability to brain tissue recognised in TBI:
- Inadequate oxygen delivery (DO2(brain)=Cerebral Blood Flow (CBF) x Oxygen Capacity in Blood) Firstly, we will ensure adequate haemoglobin concentration (>8g/dl) within the blood and normovolemia to ensure adequate oxygen carrying capacity. Cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) is monitored as a surrogate of CBF and is usually maintained at around 60-80 mmHg using vasopressors in the NCCU. The CPP target will be based on the autoregulatory parameters of the individual patient utilising ICM+ software. The pressure reactivity index (PRx), is a measure of the ability of the cerebral vasculature to autoregulate to differing CPP (Czosnyka et al., 1997). Keeping the patient's CPP in this autoregulatory range has been show in observational studies to improve outcome (Aries et al., 2012, Needham et al., 2016). If the PRx is >0.3, we will increase the CPP by 10-20 mmHg (to a maximum of 80mmHg as per the upper threshold suggested in the BTF guidelines) (Bratton et al., 2007a).
- Diffusion Barrier Even with adequate oxygen delivery, microcirculatory collapse at the capillary level can lead to tissue hypoxia (Menon et al., 2004). In this circumstance, increasing the partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood (PaO2) can increase the gradient between oxygen within the blood and the brain tissue and drive oxygen into the tissues (Reinert et al., 2003). This will be achieved by increasing the fractional inspired oxygen (FiO2) by 40% to a maximum FiO2 of 80%.
STAGE 3: Ensure adequate metabolic substrate delivery; increase brain glucose >1.0 mmol/L Glucose is the primary biochemical substrate in order to generate pyruvate through glycolysis. Brain tissue hypoglycaemia, measured using microdialysis, has been shown to be common following TBI, and is correlated with an unfavourable outcome (Stein et al., 2012). If brain tissue glucose levels falls <1.0 mmol/L, we will increase plasma glucose to 7-10 mmol/L, as lower levels have been shown to correlate to brain tissue hypoglacemia (Oddo et al., 2008), using 50% dextrose. Glucose manipulation has previously been demonstrated to improve LPR (Oddo et al., 2008).
STAGE 4: Persistent LPR>25 despite all monitoring modalities normalized; consider mitochondrial dysfunction The mitochondria are the site of oxidative phosphorylation within cells generating Adenine-Tri-Phosphate (ATP) in the presence of oxygen and suitable biochemical substrate (typically pyruvate) in the tricarboxylic acid (TCA) cycle. It has been empirically demonstrated that following TBI, even in the presence of adequate oxygenation and glucose the mitochondria are incapable of utilising these substrates for energy generation(Verweij et al., 2000). In this circumstance, limited amounts of ATP are generated through anaerobic pathways generating lactate as a byproduct, thus increasing the LPR. In this case, LP ratio is increased, but with an a normal pyruvate concentration (>70mmol/l). In this circumstance there are no accepted pharmacological therapies although in the literature both succinate, a component of the tricarboxcylic acid cycle (Ehinger et al., 2016), and Cyclosporin A, a calcineurin inhibitor, (Mbye et al., 2009) have shown potential efficacy against mitochondrial dysfunction, and Cyclosporin A has a proven safety profile in TBI patients (Mazzeo et al., 2009). It will be up to the treating physician to decide if they wish to consider novel neuroprotective agents or metabolic substrates that have shown promising results in the treatment of mitochondrial dysfunction.
Sampling strategies and data collection
Multimodality monitoring parameters are collected in the neuro-critical care unit (NCCU) in real time, including ICP, CPP (PRx) and PbO2 as well as potential treatments provided. Microdialysis parameters, including the brain metabolites glucose, pyruvate, lactate, glycerol and glutamate, will be sampled every 30 minutes by research nurses in the NCCU. When intracranial monitoring is not deemed necessary anymore, it will be discontinued as per conventional management. The number of interventions that the patient receives and any deviation from the protocol will be recorded.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 65 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Patients suffering from traumatic brain injury in need of intracranial monitoring admitted to the neuro-critical care unit at Addenbrooke's hospital, Cambridge, England.
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Patients with head injury requiring ICP monitoring
- Age 18-65 years
- Abnormal CT scan
Key exclusion criteria (8 listed)
- Bilateral fixed and dilated pupils
- Bleeding diathesis
- Thrombocytopenia (platelets < 100)
- Devastating injuries; patient not expected to survive > 24 hours
- Brainstem damage
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
LPR <25
Time frame: During neuro-critical care (the first 10 days following trauma).
Decrease of lactate:pyruvate ratio to below 25
Different pathological targets
Time frame: During the neuro-critical care period (first 10 days after trauma)
How many patients have the different pathological targets, including 1. Intracranial hypertension (LPR corrected if ICP <20mmHg), 2. Delivery failure (if LPR is corrected when PbO2 is improved and CPP increased). 3.Oxygen Diffusion Barrier (LPR is corrected if PbO2 is increased through FiO2 increase). 4. Neuroglycopenia (LPR is corrected if brain glucose is increased) or 5. Mitochondrial dysfunction (LPR remains increased despite all the therapies applied).
4 secondary outcomes
Monitoring correlation
Time frame: During the neuro-critical care period (first 10 days after trauma)
Functional Outcome
Time frame: 6 months following injury
Cytokine concentration in MD
Time frame: During the neuro-critical care period (first 10 days after trauma)
Biomarker concentration in serum
Time frame: During the neuro-critical care (first 10 days after trauma)
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 14 Jul 2020.
- Background: PubMed 18162698Hyder AA, Wunderlich CA, Puvanachandra P, Gururaj G, Kobusingye OC. The impact of traumatic brain injuries: a global perspective. NeuroRehabilitation. 2007;22(5):341-53.
- Background: PubMed 8774396Jennett B. Epidemiology of head injury. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1996 Apr;60(4):362-9. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.60.4.362. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 6779889Jennett B, MacMillan R. Epidemiology of head injury. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1981 Jan 10;282(6258):101-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.282.6258.101.
- Background: PubMed 9570046Hutchinson PJ, Kirkpatrick PJ, Addison J, Jackson S, Pickard JD. The management of minor traumatic brain injury. J Accid Emerg Med. 1998 Mar;15(2):84-8. doi: 10.1136/emj.15.2.84.
- Background: PubMed 20504161Masel BE, DeWitt DS. Traumatic brain injury: a disease process, not an event. J Neurotrauma. 2010 Aug;27(8):1529-40. doi: 10.1089/neu.2010.1358.
- Background: PubMed 17573392Werner C, Engelhard K. Pathophysiology of traumatic brain injury. Br J Anaesth. 2007 Jul;99(1):4-9. doi: 10.1093/bja/aem131.
- Background: PubMed 22435793Carney N, Lujan S, Dikmen S, Temkin N, Petroni G, Pridgeon J, Barber J, Machamer J, Cherner M, Chaddock K, Hendrix T, Rondina C, Videtta W, Celix JM, Chesnut R. Intracranial pressure monitoring in severe traumatic brain injury in latin america: process and methods for a multi-center randomized controlled trial. J Neurotrauma. 2012 Jul 20;29(11):2022-9. doi: 10.1089/neu.2011.2019. Epub 2012 May 15.
- Background: PubMed 21247930Timofeev I, Carpenter KL, Nortje J, Al-Rawi PG, O'Connell MT, Czosnyka M, Smielewski P, Pickard JD, Menon DK, Kirkpatrick PJ, Gupta AK, Hutchinson PJ. Cerebral extracellular chemistry and outcome following traumatic brain injury: a microdialysis study of 223 patients. Brain. 2011 Feb;134(Pt 2):484-94. doi: 10.1093/brain/awq353. Epub 2011 Jan 18.
- Background: PubMed 16821754Sarrafzadeh AS, Sakowitz OW, Callsen TA, Lanksch WR, Unterberg AW. Bedside microdialysis for early detection of cerebral hypoxia in traumatic brain injury. Neurosurg Focus. 2000 Nov 15;9(5):e2. doi: 10.3171/foc.2000.9.5.2.
- Background: PubMed 16751641Nortje J, Gupta AK. The role of tissue oxygen monitoring in patients with acute brain injury. Br J Anaesth. 2006 Jul;97(1):95-106. doi: 10.1093/bja/ael137. Epub 2006 Jun 3.
- Background: PubMed 14650638Smielewski P, Coles JP, Fryer TD, Minhas PS, Menon DK, Pickard JD. Integrated image analysis solutions for PET datasets in damaged brain. J Clin Monit Comput. 2002 Dec;17(7-8):427-40. doi: 10.1023/a:1026293611455.
- Background: PubMed 12843790Vespa PM, McArthur D, O'Phelan K, Glenn T, Etchepare M, Kelly D, Bergsneider M, Martin NA, Hovda DA. Persistently low extracellular glucose correlates with poor outcome 6 months after human traumatic brain injury despite a lack of increased lactate: a microdialysis study. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2003 Jul;23(7):865-77. doi: 10.1097/01.WCB.0000076701.45782.EF.
- Head injury statistics in the UKLink provided by the sponsor.
Related trials for Traumatic Brain INjury
Active, not recruitingObservational study
Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury Epileptogenesis Project (TRACK-TBI EPI)
Traumatic Brain Injury, Post-traumatic Epilepsy
Enrolling by invitationPhase 1
Pilot Safety and Exploratory Efficacy of PSC-05 for the Treatment of Chronic Mild Traumatic Brain Injury
Mild Traumatic Brain Injury
RecruitingObservational study
Intracranial Pressure Monitoring in Moderate Traumatic Brain Injury
Moderate Traumatic Brain Injury
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
Nanopulse Laser Therapy
TBI (Traumatic Brain Injury)
RecruitingObservational study
Effect of Different Intravenous Fluids on Post-operative Chronic Subdural Hematoma Size and Recurrence
Chronic Subdural Hematoma
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Traumatic Brain INjury and Microdialysis, run by University of Cambridge at 1 site in United Kingdom.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 8 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 14 Jul 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United Kingdom. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Adel Helmy, MA MB BChir FRCS PhD (00441223 336946, adelhelmy@doctors.org.uk), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
LPR <25 (time frame: During neuro-critical care (the first 10 days following trauma).). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02993549, which also lists 17 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 14 Jul 2020.