Preliminary experience of the estimation of cerebral perfusion pressure using transcranial Doppler ultrasonography
- aAcademic Neurosurgery and Wolfson Brain Imaging Centre, Box 167, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge CB2 2QQ, UK, bNeurosurgical Department, CHRU, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France, cDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK
- Dr M CzosnykaMC141{at}MEDSCHL.CAM.AC.UK
- Received 26 January 2000
- Revised 20 June 2000
- Accepted 14 September 2000
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The direct calculation of cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) as the difference between mean arterial pressure and intracranial pressure (ICP) produces a number which does not always adequately describe conditions for brain perfusion. A non-invasive method of CPP measurement has previously been reported based on waveform analysis of blood flow velocity measured in the middle cerebral artery (MCA) by transcranial Doppler. This study describes the results of clinical tests of the prototype bilateral transcranial Doppler based apparatus for non-invasive CPP measurement (nCPP).
METHODS Twenty five consecutive, paralysed, sedated, and ventilated patients with head injury were studied. Intracranial pressure (ICP) and arterial blood pressure (ABP) were monitored continuously. The left and right MCAs were insonated daily (108 measurements) using a purpose built transcranial Doppler monitor (Neuro QTM, Deltex Ltd, Chichester, UK) with software capable of the non-invasive estimation of CPP. Time averaged values of mean and diastolic flow velocities (FVm, FVd) and ABP were calculated. nCPP was then computed as: ABP×FVd/FVm+14.
RESULTS The absolute difference between real CPP and nCPP (daily averages) was less than 10 mm Hg in 89% of measurements and less than 13 mm Hg in 92% of measurements. The 95% confidence range for predictors was no wider than ±12 mm Hg (n=25) for the CPP, varying from 70 to 95 mm Hg. The absolute value of side to side differences in nCPP was significantly greater (p<0.05) when CT based evidence of brain swelling was present and was also positively correlated (p<0.05) with mean ICP.
CONCLUSION The device is of potential benefit for intermittent or continuous monitoring of brain perfusion pressure in situations where the direct measurement is not available or its reliability is in question.
