- Browse by Author
Browsing by Author "Vespa, Paul"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item A management algorithm for patients with intracranial pressure monitoring: the Seattle International Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Consensus Conference (SIBICC)(Springer, 2019-12-01) Hawryluk, Gregory W. J.; Aguilera, Sergio; Buki, Andras; Bulger, Eileen; Citerio, Giuseppe; Cooper, D. Jamie; Arrastia, Ramon Diaz; Diringer, Michael; Figaji, Anthony; Gao, Guoyi; Geocadin, Romergryko; Ghajar, Jamshid; Harris, Odette; Hoffer, Alan; Hutchinson, Peter; Joseph, Mathew; Kitagawa, Ryan; Manley, Geoffrey; Mayer, Stephan; Menon, David K.; Meyfroidt, Geert; Michael, Daniel B.; Oddo, Mauro; Okonkwo, David; Patel, Mayur; Robertson, Claudia; Rosenfeld, Jeffrey V.; Rubiano, Andres M.; Sahuquillo, Juan; Servadei, Franco; Shutter, Lori; Stein, Deborah; Stocchetti, Nino; Taccone, Fabio Silvio; Timmons, Shelly; Tsai, Eve; Ullman, Jamie S.; Vespa, Paul; Videtta, Walter; Wright, David W.; Zammit, Christopher; Chesnut, Randall M.; Neurological Surgery, School of MedicineBackground Management algorithms for adult severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) were omitted in later editions of the Brain Trauma Foundation’s sTBI Management Guidelines, as they were not evidence-based. Methods We used a Delphi-method-based consensus approach to address management of sTBI patients undergoing intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring. Forty-two experienced, clinically active sTBI specialists from six continents comprised the panel. Eight surveys iterated queries and comments. An in-person meeting included whole- and small-group discussions and blinded voting. Consensus required 80% agreement. We developed heatmaps based on a traffic-light model where panelists’ decision tendencies were the focus of recommendations. Results We provide comprehensive algorithms for ICP-monitor-based adult sTBI management. Consensus established 18 interventions as fundamental and ten treatments not to be used. We provide a three-tier algorithm for treating elevated ICP. Treatments within a tier are considered empirically equivalent. Higher tiers involve higher risk therapies. Tiers 1, 2, and 3 include 10, 4, and 3 interventions, respectively. We include inter-tier considerations, and recommendations for critical neuroworsening to assist the recognition and treatment of declining patients. Novel elements include guidance for autoregulation-based ICP treatment based on MAP Challenge results, and two heatmaps to guide (1) ICP-monitor removal and (2) consideration of sedation holidays for neurological examination. Conclusions Our modern and comprehensive sTBI-management protocol is designed to assist clinicians managing sTBI patients monitored with ICP-monitors alone. Consensus-based (class III evidence), it provides management recommendations based on combined expert opinion. It reflects neither a standard-of-care nor a substitute for thoughtful individualized management.Item Proceedings of the Second Curing Coma Campaign NIH Symposium: Challenging the Future of Research for Coma and Disorders of Consciousness(Springer, 2022) Mainali, Shraddha; Aiyagari, Venkatesh; Alexander, Sheila; Bodien, Yelena; Boerwinkle, Varina; Boly, Melanie; Brown, Emery; Brown, Jeremy; Claassen, Jan; Edlow, Brian L.; Fink, Ericka L.; Fins, Joseph J.; Foreman, Brandon; Frontera, Jennifer; Geocadin, Romergryko G.; Giacino, Joseph; Gilmore, Emily J.; Gosseries, Olivia; Hammond, Flora; Helbok, Raimund; Hemphill, J. Claude; Hirsch, Karen; Kim, Keri; Laureys, Steven; Lewis, Ariane; Ling, Geoffrey; Livesay, Sarah L.; McCredie, Victoria; McNett, Molly; Menon, David; Molteni, Erika; Olson, DaiWai; O’Phelan, Kristine; Park, Soojin; Polizzotto, Len; Provencio, Jose Javier; Puybasset, Louis; Venkatasubba Rao, Chethan P.; Robertson, Courtney; Rohaut, Benjamin; Rubin, Michael; Sharshar, Tarek; Shutter, Lori; Silva, Gisele Sampaio; Smith, Wade; Steven, Robert D.; Thibaut, Aurore; Vespa, Paul; Wagner, Amy K.; Ziai, Wendy C.; Zink, Elizabeth; Suarez, Jose I.; Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, School of MedicineThis proceedings article presents actionable research targets on the basis of the presentations and discussions at the 2nd Curing Coma National Institutes of Health (NIH) symposium held from May 3 to May 5, 2021. Here, we summarize the background, research priorities, panel discussions, and deliverables discussed during the symposium across six major domains related to disorders of consciousness. The six domains include (1) Biology of Coma, (2) Coma Database, (3) Neuroprognostication, (4) Care of Comatose Patients, (5) Early Clinical Trials, and (6) Long-term Recovery. Following the 1st Curing Coma NIH virtual symposium held on September 9 to September 10, 2020, six workgroups, each consisting of field experts in respective domains, were formed and tasked with identifying gaps and developing key priorities and deliverables to advance the mission of the Curing Coma Campaign. The highly interactive and inspiring presentations and panel discussions during the 3-day virtual NIH symposium identified several action items for the Curing Coma Campaign mission, which we summarize in this article.