Adverse effects of prolonged hyperventilation in patients with severe head injury: a randomized clinical trial. A multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial of the efficacy of mild hypothermia for severely head injured patients with low intracranial pressure. Mild Hypothermia Study Group in Japan. A multicenter trial on the efficacy of using tirilazad mesylate in cases of head injury. Little benefit from mild hypothermia therapy for severely head injured patients with low intracranial pressure. Mild hypothermia via selective head cooling as neuroprotective therapy in term neonates with perinatal asphyxia: an experience from a single neonatal intensive care unit. High-dose barbiturate control of elevated intracranial pressure in patients with severe head injury. Failure of the competitive N-methyl-D-aspartate antagonist Selfotel (CGS 19755) in the treatment of severe head injury: results of two phase III clinical trials. The Selfotel Investigators. Failure of prophylactic barbiturate coma in the treatment of severe head injury. Does routine follow up after head injury help? A randomised controlled trial.
There is still controversy over whether or not patients should be hyperventilated after traumatic brain injury, and a randomized trial has never been conducted. The theoretical advantages of hyperventilation are cerebral vasoconstriction for intracranial pressure (ICP) control and reversal of brain and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) acidosis. Possible disadvantages include cerebral vasoconstriction to such an extent that cerebral ischemia ensues, and only a short-lived effect on CSF pH with a loss of HCO3-buffer from CSF. The latter disadvantage might be overcome by the addition of the buffer tromethamine (THAM), which has shown some promise in experimental and clinical use. Accordingly, a trial was performed with patients randomly assigned to receive normal ventilation (PaCO2 35 +/- 2 mm Hg (mean +/- standard deviation): control group), hyperventilation (PaCO2 25 +/- 2 mm Hg: HV group), or hyperventilation plus THAM (PaCO2 25 +/- 2 mm Hg: HV + THAM group). Stratification into subgroups of patients with motor scores of 1-3 and 4-5 took place. Outcome was assessed according to the Glasgow Outcome Scale at 3, 6, and 12 months. There were 41 patients in the control group, 36 in the HV group, and 36 in the HV + THAM group. The mean Glasgow Coma Scale score for each group was 5.7 +/- 1.7, 5.6 +/- 1.7, and 5.9 +/- 1.7, respectively; this score and other indicators of severity of injury were not significantly different. A 100% follow-up review was obtained. At 3 and 6 months after injury the number of patients with a favorable outcome (good or moderately disabled) was significantly (p less than 0.05) lower in the hyperventilated patients than in the control and HV + THAM groups. This occurred only in patients with a motor score of 4-5. At 12 months posttrauma this difference was not significant (p = 0.13). Biochemical data indicated that hyperventilation could not sustain alkalinization in the CSF, although THAM could. Accordingly, cerebral blood flow (CBF) was lower in the HV + THAM group than in the control and HV groups, but neither CBF nor arteriovenous difference of oxygen data indicated the occurrence of cerebral ischemia in any of the three groups. Although mean ICP could be kept well below 25 mm Hg in all three groups, the course of ICP was most stable in the HV + THAM group. It is concluded that prophylactic hyperventilation is deleterious in head-injured patients with motor scores of 4-5.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS) The criteria for the use of mild hypothermia (34 degrees C) in severely head injured patients have not been standardized. A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted to determine whether mild hypothermia is essential in the treatment of severely head injured patients with low intracranial pressure (ICP).
                At 11 medical centers, 91 severely head injured patients with an admission Glasgow Coma Scale score of 8 or less in whom ICP could be maintained below 25 mm Hg by conventional therapies were divided randomly into two groups: the mild hypothermia group (HT group, 45 patients) and the normothermia group (NT group, 46 patients). Patients in the HT group were exposed to mild hypothermia (34 degrees C) for 48 hours, followed by rewarming at 1 degrees C per day for 3 days, whereas patients in the NT group were exposed to normothermia (37 degrees C) for 5 days. The two groups were similar with respect to prognostic factors, and there was no difference in clinical outcome at 3 months postinjury. During treatment, there was a significantly greater use of neuromuscular blocking agents in the HT group (p = 0.011). During the initial 2 weeks postinjury, the incidences of pneumonia, meningitis, leukocytopenia, thrombocytopenia, hypernatremia, hypokalemia, and hyperamylasemia were significantly higher in the HT than in the NT group (p < 0.05).
                Mild hypothermia should not be used for the treatment of severely head injured patients with low ICP because this therapy conveys no advantage over normothermia in such patients. The authors prospectively studied the efficacy of tirilazad mesylate, a novel aminosteroid, in humans with head injuries.
                A cohort of 1120 head-injured patients received at least one dose of study medication (tirilazad or placebo). Eighty-five percent (957) of the patients had suffered a severe head injury (Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] score 4-8) and 15% (163) had sustained a moderate head injury (GCS score 9-12). Six-month outcomes for the tirilazad- and placebo-treated groups for the Glasgow Outcome Scale categories of both good recovery and death showed no significant difference (good recovery in the tirilazad-treated group was 39% compared with the placebo group in which it was 42% [p=0.461]; death in the tirilazad-treated group occurred in 26% of patients compared with the placebo group, in which it occurred in 25% [p=0.750]). Subgroup analysis suggested that tirilazad mesylate may be effective in reducing mortality rates in males suffering from severe head injury with accompanying traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage (death in the tirilazad-treated group occurred in 34% of patients; in the placebo group it occurred in 43% [p=0.026]). No significant differences in frequency or types of serious adverse events were shown between the treatment and placebo groups.
                Striking problems with imbalance concerning basic prognostic variables were observed in spite of the large population studied. These imbalances concerned pretreatment hypotension, pretreatment hypoxia, and the incidence of epidural hematomas. In future trials of pharmacological therapy for severe head injury, serious consideration must be given to alternative randomization strategies. Given the heterogeneous nature of head injury and the identification of populations that do relatively well with standard therapy, target populations with a higher risk for mortality and morbidity may be more suitable for clinical trials of such agents. This study was performed to determine whether mild hypothermia therapy is essential for the treatment of severely head injured patients in whom intracranial pressure (ICP) can be maintained below 20 mm Hg by using conventional therapies.
                Sixteen consecutive severely head injured patients fulfilled the following criteria: the patient's ICP was maintained below 20 mm Hg by using fluid restriction, hyperventilation, and high-dose barbiturate therapy; and the patient had a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 8 or less on admission. After conventional therapies had been applied, the patients were divided randomly into two groups: the mild hypothermia group (HT group; eight patients) and the normothermia group (NT group; eight patients). The HT group received mild hypothermia (intracranial temperature 34 degrees C) therapy for 48 hours followed by rewarming at 1 degree C per day for 3 days, whereas the NT group received normothermia (intracranial temperature 37 degrees C) therapy for 5 days. Specimens of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) taken from an intraventricular catheter every 24 hours were analyzed for the presence of excitatory amino acids ([EAAs] glutamate, aspartate, and glycine) and cytokines (tumor necrosis factor-alpha, interleukin [IL]-1beta, IL-6, IL-8, and IL-10). The two groups did not differ significantly in patient age, neurological status, or level of ICP. There were no significant differences in daily changes in CSF concentrations of EAAs and cytokines between the two groups. The incidence of pneumonia was slightly higher in the HT group compared with the NT group (p = 0.059). The incidence of diabetes insipidus associated with hypernatremia was significantly higher in the HT group compared with that in the NT group (p < 0.01). The two groups did not differ with respect to their clinical outcomes.
                The authors recommend normothermia therapy for the treatment of severely head injured patients in whom ICP can be maintained at lower than 20 mm Hg by using conventional therapies, because mild hypothermia therapy does not convey any advantage over normothermia therapy in such patients. The objective of this study was to determine the efficacy of mild hypothermia via selective head cooling as a neuroprotective therapy in term infants with perinatal asphyxia.
                Full-term newborns who had 5 min Apgar scores <6, first arterial blood gas pH<7.10 or BD>15 mEq/l, and with the clinical signs of encephalopathy were enrolled within 6 h after birth. Patients were randomized to receive mild hypothermia treatment via selective head cooling for a total of 72 h or receive routine treatment as a control. Brain hypoxic-ischemic injury was quantified based on the head computed tomographic scan (CT scan) at postnatal age 5-7 days and a Neonatal Behavioral Neurological Assessment (NBNA) score at 7-10 days of life.
                A total of 58 patients (30 hypothermia, 28 control) completed the study. Hypothermia was well tolerated in this study and attenuated the hypoxic-ischemic brain injury due to perinatal asphyxia. Head CT scan demonstrated moderate to severe hypoxic-ischemic changes in only 4/30 cases from the hypothermic group. In contrast, 18/28 cases in the control group showed moderate to severe hypoxic-ischemic changes (chi (2)=15.97, P<0.01). Brain hypothermia also significantly improved the NBNA score (32+/-2 in the hypothermic group vs 28+/-3 in the control group, P<0.01).
                Our results suggest that selective head cooling may be used as a neuroprotective therapy in term neonates with perinatal asphyxia. A long-term follow-up study is needed to further validate the results of this study. In a five-center study, 73 patients with severe head injury and elevated intracranial pressure (ICP) were randomly assigned to receive either a regimen that included high-dose pentobarbital or one that was otherwise similar but did not include pentobarbital. The results indicated a 2:1 benefit for those treated with the drug with regard to ICP control. When patients were stratified by prerandomization cardiac complications, the advantage increased to 4:1. A multiple logistic model considering treatment and selected baseline variables indicated a significant positive treatment effect of barbiturates, a significant effect of time from injury to randomization, and an interaction of treatment with cardiovascular complications. However, of 925 patients potentially eligible for randomization, only 12% met ICP randomization criteria. The results support the hypothesis that high-dose pentobarbital is an effective adjunctive therapy, but that it is indicated in only a small subset of patients with severe head injury. Excessive activity of excitatory amino acids released after head trauma has been demonstrated to contribute to progressive injury in animal models and human studies. Several pharmacological agents that act as antagonists to the glutamate receptor have shown promise in limiting this progression. The efficacy of the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist Selfotel (CGS 19755) was evaluated in two parallel studies of severely head injured patients, defined as patients with post resuscitation Glasgow Coma Scale scores of 4 to 8.
                A total of 693 patients were prospectively enrolled in two multicenter double-blind studies. Comparison between the treatment groups showed no significant difference with regard to demographic data, previous incidence of hypotension, and severity of injury. As the study progressed, the Safety and Monitoring Committee became concerned about possible increased deaths and serious brain-related adverse events in the treatment arm of the two head injury trials, as well as deaths in the two stroke trials being monitored concurrently. The Selfotel trials were stopped prematurely because of this concern and because an interim efficacy analysis indicated that the likelihood of demonstrating success with the agent if the studies had been completed was almost nil.
                Subsequently, more complete data analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in mortality rates in all cases between the two treatment groups in the head injury trials. In this report the authors examine the studies in detail and discuss the potential application of the data to future trial designs. In certain subgroups of severely head-injured patients, the mortality rate remains unacceptably high. The authors describe a randomized, controlled trial of prophylactic pentobarbital therapy in a group of these patients. Pentobarbital was started as soon as possible after the head injury, regardless of the intracranial pressure (ICP), and was continued for a prescribed period of time. The study included 53 consecutive head-injured patients over the age of 12 years, who had either an acute intradural hematoma (subdural and/or intracerebral, large enough to warrant surgical decompression), or no mass lesion but whose best motor response was abnormal flexion or extension. All patients in the study were randomly assigned to a control group (26 cases) or a pentobarbital-treated group (27 cases) once the diagnosis had been made and informed consent obtained. All patients were treated with the same protocol of aggressive resuscitation, prompt diagnosis and treatment of mass lesions, and intensive care, with close follow-up monitoring. The randomization was effective in producing a close match between the control and treated groups with respect to age, sex distribution, cause of injury, neurological status, intracranial lesions, prevalence of early systemic insults, midline shift, and initial ICP. Outcome was essentially the same in each group. There was no difference between groups in the incidence of elevated ICP, the duration of ICP elevation, or the response of ICP elevations to treatment. Arterial hypotension occurred in 14 patients (54%) in the treated group and only two patients (7%) in the untreated group. Based on these data the authors cannot recommend the prophylactic use of pentobarbital coma in the treatment of patients with severe head injury. They also believe that its use is accompanied by significant side effects which can potentially worsen the condition of a patient with severe head injury. To evaluate the Medical Disability Society's 1988 recommendation that "every patient attending hospital after a head injury should be registered and offered an outpatient follow up appointment" by determining whether offering a routine follow up service to patients presenting to hospital with a head injury of any severity affects outcome six months later.
                A randomised controlled trial design with masked assessment of outcome.
                A mixed rural and urban health district with a population of about 560000.
                1156 consecutive patients resident in Oxfordshire aged between 16 and 65 years presenting over 13 months to accident and emergency departments or admitted to hospital and diagnosed as having a head injury of any severity, including those with other injuries.
                Patients were registered and randomised to one of two groups. Both groups continued to receive the standard service offered by the hospitals. The early follow up group were approached at 7-10 days after injury and offered additional information, advice, support, and further intervention as needed. All randomised patients were approached for follow up assessment six months after injury by independent clinicians blind to their group.
                Validated questionnaires were used to elicit ratings of post-concussion symptoms (the Rivermead postconcussion symptoms questionnaire), and changes in work, relationships, leisure, social, and domestic activities (the Rivermead head injury follow up questionnaire).
                The two groups were comparable at randomisation. Data was obtained at six months on 226 of 577 "control" patients and 252 of 579 "trial" patients (59% were lost to follow up). There were no significant differences overall between the trial and control groups at follow up, but subgroup analysis of the patients with moderate or severe head injuries (posttraumatic amnesia > or = one hour, or admitted to hospital), showed that those in the early intervention group had significantly fewer difficulties with everyday activities (P = 0.03).
                The results from the 41% of patients followed up do not support the recommendation of offering a routine follow up to all patients with head injury, but they do suggest that routine follow up is most likely to be beneficial to patients with moderate or severe head injuries. Some of those with less severe injuries do continue to experience difficulties and need access to services. A further trial is under way to test these conclusions.
The data available are inadequate to assess any potential benefit or harm that might result from hyperventilation in severe head injury. Randomised controlled trials to assess the effectiveness of hyperventilation therapy following severe head injury are needed.