Skip to main content
Download PDF

Early management of isolated severe traumatic brain injury patients in a hospital without neurosurgical capabilities: a consensus and clinical recommendations of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES)

World Journal of Emergency Surgery volume 18, Article number: 5 (2023) Cite this article

A Correction to this article was published on 06 April 2023

This article has been updated

Abstract

Background

Severe traumatic brain-injured (TBI) patients should be primarily admitted to a hub trauma center (hospital with neurosurgical capabilities) to allow immediate delivery of appropriate care in a specialized environment. Sometimes, severe TBI patients are admitted to a spoke hospital (hospital without neurosurgical capabilities), and scarce data are available regarding the optimal management of severe isolated TBI patients who do not have immediate access to neurosurgical care.

Methods

A multidisciplinary consensus panel composed of 41 physicians selected for their established clinical and scientific expertise in the acute management of TBI patients with different specializations (anesthesia/intensive care, neurocritical care, acute care surgery, neurosurgery and neuroradiology) was established. The consensus was endorsed by the World Society of Emergency Surgery, and a modified Delphi approach was adopted.

Results

A total of 28 statements were proposed and discussed. Consensus was reached on 22 strong recommendations and 3 weak recommendations. In three cases, where consensus was not reached, no recommendation was provided.

Conclusions

This consensus provides practical recommendations to support clinician’s decision making in the management of isolated severe TBI patients in centers without neurosurgical capabilities and during transfer to a hub center.

Background

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading cause of mortality and disability worldwide [1,2,3,4]. Severe TBI patients often require emergency neurosurgery (i.e., to remove post-traumatic mass lesions) and/or invasive neuromonitoring (i.e., to guide and personalize therapy) to improve mortality and neurological outcomes [1, 3, 5]. Considering the above, severe TBI patients should be primarily admitted to a hub trauma center (hospital with neurosurgical capabilities) to allow immediate delivery of appropriate care in a specialized environment [1, 3, 6,7,8]. Sometimes, severe TBI patients are admitted to a spoke hospital (hospital without neurosurgical capabilities) due to geographic or patient-related factors [9]. There is currently a paucity of available literature regarding the optimal management of severe isolated TBI patients at a spoke hospital [3]. The specific aim of this consensus is to provide recommendations on the early management of severe isolated TBI patients admitted to a spoke hospital and during the transfer to a hub hospital. Precisely, we refer to patients admitted to an urban spoke hospital without neurosurgical capabilities in a high-income country with the availability of an intensive care unit (ICU), operating room (OR) and computed tomography (CT) scan. In the case of severe TBI with extra-cranial lesions or admitted to hospitals with limited resources, readers can refer to several published articles/guidelines for initial management [10,11,12,13,14].

Methods

The multidisciplinary consensus panel was composed of anesthesiologists/intensivists/neurointensivists (n = 13), neurosurgeons (n = 14), neuroradiologists (n = 2) and acute care surgeons (n = 13) with expertise in TBI care (see Additional file 1: Appendix 1). Following a non-systematic review of the literature, the steering committee (EP, CR and FC) identified the main domains to discuss and generated a list of questions to be addressed by the panel. Three subsequent online questionnaires were administered between July and September 2022. The initial list of statements (28) was formulated and distributed to the panelists 1 week prior to every Delphi round to allow modifications or additional statements. The modified interactive Delphi process was conducted using online tools. After a preliminary round, based on the initial answers and on comments/suggestions by the voting members, ambiguities and inconsistencies in the questionnaire were identified and corrected, generating a refined question set for subsequent voting rounds. We used an iterative approach; members were informed of the degree of consensus reached on the initial question round and asked to reconsider agreement or disagreement. Then, based on the answers collected in the third stage, statements for practical advice were proposed. The objective was to reach consensus, not necessarily unanimity.

The analysis of voting results was performed by a non-voting experienced methodologist (CR). A decision rule was predefined to ascertain the degree of consensus required to provide a recommendation. Statements were classified as strong recommendation, weak recommendation and no recommendation when > 85%, 75–85% and < 75% of votes were in favor, respectively.

In this consensus, we specifically refer to isolated severe TBI patients [Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score ≤ 8] admitted to a spoke non-rural hospital of a high-income country with the availability of: ICU, OR and whole-body CT scanner.

Results

The consensus provided 25 recommendations (Table 1): 22 were strong recommendations, endorsed by more than 85% of participants, while 3 were weak recommendations, supported by 75–85%. The consensus flowchart is reported in Fig. 1. We were unable to reach consensus for 3 statements. The consensus recommendations are listed below with the percentage of agreement.

Table 1 List of consensus recommendations
Full size table
Fig. 1
figure 1

Consensus flowchart. (1)Collaboration/communication (i.e., check for availability of ICU bed/OR, significant clinical deterioration during transfer, etc.) between different medical specialties (anesthesiology/intensive care/neurocritical care, neurosurgery, neuroradiology, trauma surgery, etc.). (2)Patients with signs/elevated risk of herniation and need for emergent neurosurgery with brain CT scan already done in spoke hospital with neurosurgical consultation. (3)In the case of invasive ABP monitoring, the arterial transducer should be zeroed at the level of the tragus. (4)At risk of needing neurosurgery (including ICP monitoring). (5)Serial examination in the spoke hospital and during transfer to the hub center to detect neuro-worsening. We recommend against the discontinuation of sedation to obtain a reliable neurological evaluation in patients with radiological signs of intracranial hypertension (i.e., midline shift, compression of the basal cisterns, sulcal effacement, etc.). In this scenario, only pupil examination, especially during the transfer, would be useful. (6)Also during transfer. Abbreviations TBI, traumatic brain injury; ICP, intracranial pressure; ICU, intensive care unit; OR, operating room; CT, computed tomography; GCS, Glasgow coma scale; ABP, arterial blood pressure; ECG, electrocardiogram; HR, heart rate; SpO2, peripheral oxygen saturation; ETCO2, end-tidal carbon dioxide; MAP, mean arterial pressure; SAP, systolic arterial pressure; PLT, platelet; PT, prothrombin time; aPTT, activated partial thromboplastin time; POC, point-of-care; TEG, thromboelastography; ROTEM, rotational thromboelastometry; EEG, electroencephalogram; Hb, hemoglobin; PaCO2, arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide; Na, sodium; CC, critical care

Full size image

Recommendation 1

We recommend that all salvageable (i.e., patients who may recover, at least to some extent, with appropriate treatment) severe isolated TBI patients needing or at risk of needing neurosurgery [i.e., for surgical mass lesion and/or intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring] admitted to a spoke center should be rapidly transferred to a hub center after hemodynamic and respiratory stabilization (agreement %: 97.6, strong recommendation).

Recommendation 2

We recommend the utilization of a telemedicine service for rapid digital image transfer from the spoke to the hub center (agreement %: 92.7, strong recommendation).

Recommendation 3

We recommend, before and during transfer from the spoke to the hub center, a continuous and clear collaboration/communication (i.e., check for availability of ICU bed/OR, significant clinical deterioration during transfer, etc.) between different medical specialties (anesthesiology/intensive care/neurocritical care, neurosurgery, neuroradiology, trauma surgery, etc.) (agreement %: 92.7, strong recommendation).

Recommendation 4

We recommend sedation, intubation and mechanical ventilation for the transfer of all severe TBI patients (agreement %: 95, strong recommendation).

Recommendation 5

We recommend that the transfer of severe TBI patients should be performed by appropriately trained and certified critical care transport personnel with experience in advanced airway management/life support strategies and basic knowledge of neurocritical care (i.e., medical management of cerebral swelling, herniation) (agreement %: 80.5, weak recommendation).

Recommendation 6

We recommend that severe salvageable TBI patients with signs/elevated risk of herniation and need for neurosurgery (brain CT scan already done in spoke hospital with neurosurgical consultation) should be directly transported form the spoke center to the OR at the hub center (agreement %: 85.1, strong recommendation).

Recommendation 7

We recommend, in severe TBI patients needing transfer to the hub center, an invasive monitoring of arterial blood pressure (ABP) in addition to the standard cardiorespiratory monitoring [electrocardiogram (ECG), heart rate (HR), peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) and end-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO2)] (agreement %: 82.9, weak recommendation).

Recommendation 8

We recommend maintaining systolic arterial pressure (SAP) > 110 mmHg or mean arterial pressure (MAP) > 80 mmHg* in severe isolated TBI patients (agreement %: 90, strong recommendation).

* In the case of invasive ABP monitoring, the arterial transducer should be zeroed at the level of the tragus.

Recommendation 9

We recommend maintaining platelet (PLT) count > 75.000/mm3 in all salvageable severe TBI patients at risk of needing neurosurgery (including ICP monitoring) (agreement %: 92, strong recommendation).

Recommendation 10

We recommend maintaining prothrombin time (PT)/activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) value < 1.5 the normal control in all salvageable severe TBI patients at risk of needing neurosurgery (including ICP monitoring) (agreement %: 90, strong recommendation).

Recommendation 11

We recommend early reversal of anticoagulant/antiplatelets agents, in all salvageable severe TBI patients at risk of needing neurosurgery (including ICP monitoring) (agreement %: 90, strong recommendation).

Recommendation 12

We recommend utilization of point-of-care (POC) tests [i.e., thromboelastography (TEG) and rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM)], if available, to optimize coagulation function in all salvageable severe TBI patients at risk of needing neurosurgery (including ICP monitoring) (agreement %: 75.6, weak recommendation).

Recommendation 13

We are unable to recommend the routine use of specific anti-seizure drugs in salvageable severe TBI patients presenting with seizure observed clinically and/or with electroencephalogram (EEG) (agreement %: 65.9, no recommendation).

Recommendation 14

We recommend performing serial neurologic evaluations (GCS + pupil examination) in the spoke center and during transfer to the hub center to detect neurologic deterioration in patients without signs of intracranial hypertension (agreement %: 95, strong recommendation).

Recommendation 15

We recommend against discontinuation of sedation to obtain a reliable neurological evaluation in patients with radiological signs of intracranial hypertension (i.e., midline shift, compression of the basal cisterns, sulcal effacement, etc.). In this scenario, only pupil examination, especially during the transfer, would be useful (agreement %: 95, strong recommendation).

Recommendation 16

We are unable to recommend use of brain ultrasonography (i.e., optic nerve sheath diameter, cerebral blood flow waveform analysis, etc.), in the presence of skilled operators, as a reliable screening non-invasive tool for detection of intracranial hypertension in the spoke center (agreement % 61, no recommendation).

Recommendation 17

We are unable to recommend use of automated pupillometry, if available, as a reliable screening non-invasive tool for detection of intracranial hypertension in the spoke center (agreement %: 63, no recommendation).

Recommendation 18

We recommend that performance of brain ultrasonography and/or automated pupillometry, if utilized in the spoke center, should not significantly delay the patient’s transfer (agreement %: 90, strong recommendation).

Recommendation 19

We recommend that severe isolated TBI patients should be maintained with a head of the bed elevated at 30°–45° to facilitate brain venous drainage in the spoke center and during transfer to the hub center (agreement %: 92.7, strong recommendation).

Recommendation 20

We recommend that, in severe TBI patients, the head should be maintained in the midline avoiding compression of the neck veins in the spoke center and during transfer to the hub center (agreement %: 97.7, strong recommendation).

Recommendation 21

We recommend avoiding core body temperature > 37.5 °C and to aim for normothermia in severe TBI patients (agreement %: 95, strong recommendation).

Recommendation 22

We recommend maintaining hemoglobin (Hb) level > 7 g/dl in severe TBI patients (agreement %: 95, strong recommendation).

Recommendation 23

We recommend maintaining SpO2 > 94% in severe TBI patients (agreement %: 87.8, strong recommendation).

Recommendation 24

We recommend maintaining an arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2) of 35–38 mmHg in severe TBI patients (agreement %: 90, strong recommendation).

Recommendation 25

We recommend maintaining a serum sodium (Na) level of 140–145 mEq/l in severe TBI patients (agreement %: 90, strong recommendation).

Recommendation 26

We recommend osmotherapy as a therapeutic maneuver to be utilized in patients with signs of intracranial hypertension/brain herniation awaiting emergent neurosurgery (agreement %: 95, strong recommendation).

Recommendation 27

We recommend short-term hyperventilation as a therapeutic maneuver that should be utilized only in patients with signs of brain herniation awaiting emergent neurosurgery (agreement %: 90, strong recommendation).

Recommendation 28

We recommend an increase in sedation, while maintaining an acceptable ABP, as a therapeutic maneuver that should be utilized in the management of patients with signs of brain herniation awaiting emergent neurosurgery (agreement %: 95, strong recommendation).

Discussion

Transfer to the HUB center

All salvageable severe isolated TBI patients, needing or at risk of needing neurosurgery (i.e., for surgical mass lesion and/or ICP monitoring) [15,16,17,18,19], should be transported to a hub center (hospital with neurosurgical capabilities). This is important not only for the surgical aspect but also to facilitate appropriate care in a specialized environment [1, 3, 6,7,8]. Moreover, a recent systematic review and meta-analysis showed that neurocritical care services are associated with improved survival and functional outcomes in critically ill adults with brain injury [20].

The transfer, as recommended also by recent guidelines [21], should be performed after cardiorespiratory stabilization. Furthermore, before and during transfer from the spoke to the hub center, a continuous and clear collaboration/communication (i.e., check for availability of ICU bed/OR, significant clinical deterioration during transfer, etc.) should occur between different medical specialties (anesthesiology/intensive care/neurocritical care, neurosurgery, neuroradiology, trauma surgery, etc.). The above-mentioned aspects, in addition to be in accordance with published guidelines [21], are of paramount importance to ensure “high-quality” TBI perioperative care [3]. In particular, severe salvageable TBI patients with signs/elevated risk of herniation and need for neurosurgery (brain CT scan already done in spoke hospital with neurosurgical consultation) could benefit from direct transport from the spoke center to the OR in the hub center. This requires not only an excellent coordination between all involved medical specialties, but review of CT scans and laboratories prior to the patient arrival; this concept is similar to what is applied in some trauma centers in the treatment of severely injured patients at increased risk for requiring lifesaving interventions or emergency surgery [22]. Some panelists suggested that patients requiring urgent surgery should be transferred irrespective of the availability of an ICU bed. This is an interesting and debated point. A TBI patient needing evacuation of a critical mass lesion could be transferred to the nearest neurosurgical unit for an operation regardless of ICU bed availability; this problem could be arranged in the post-surgical phase.

Telemedicine, allowing the transfer of radiological images by a web-based software, facilitates neurosurgical consultation between hospitals and, preventing unnecessary transfers, is life/time-saving and cost-effective [23, 24]. Telemedicine should be encouraged in this setting as has been already done for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) patients [25]. Severe TBI patients can also deteriorate at any time during the transfer (i.e., neuro-worsening, hemodynamic instability, etc.). As also suggested in other guidelines [21], these patients should be accompanied during the transport by a physician with expertise in airway management, life support strategies and basic knowledge of neurocritical care. Some panelists pointed out that worldwide there can be different systems regarding the transfer of critical care patients (i.e., paramedics). Regarding these possible organizational differences, the transfer should be carried out by appropriately trained and certified critical care transport personnel to ensure adequate quality of care. Practical protocols between hub and spoke hospitals should be encouraged to facilitate the transfer. In this regard, a prepared and shared checklist could be helpful.

Considering the above-mentioned points, adequate cardiorespiratory monitoring (ECG, HR, ABP, SpO2 and ETCO2) seems to be fundamental for the safety of the patients during the transfer [21]. Invasive ABP monitoring, being accurate and continuous, is preferable (especially in unstable severe TBI patients). However, placement of an arterial line should not excessively delay the patient transfer, and non-invasive ABP (NIABP) monitoring should be considered as a valid alternative in cases of difficult arterial access.

Airway, respiratory, hemodynamic, electrolytes and temperature management

Severe isolated TBI patients require tracheal intubation (to protect the airway) and mechanical ventilation (to optimize gas exchange) [26]. Tracheal intubation needs to be performed carefully with adequate analgesia and sedation to avoid arterial desaturation, increase in ABP exacerbating pre-existing intracranial hematoma or severe hypotension with associated cerebral hypoperfusion [21]. Some panelists suggested the utilization of drugs with a short half-life and easily titratable to allow a reliable neurological examination.

Episodes of SpO2 < 90%, being associated with increased mortality and worse neurological outcome in TBI, should be avoided [26, 27]. Cerebral perfusion is influenced by PaCO2 level, and ventilation should be adjusted to avoid hypo/hypercapnia [26, 28]. According to recent consensus conferences [26, 29], we recommend maintaining SpO2 > 94% and a PaCO2 of 35–38 mmHg. We are aware that optimal respiratory values have yet to be determined in this setting. Moreover, the absence of invasive neuromonitoring (generally available in the referral center) prevents the individualization (personalization) of care. ETCO2 values should be adapted frequently with data from arterial blood gas analysis.

Arterial hypotension (SAP < 90 mmHg), similar to hypoxia, has been associated with worse neurological outcomes in TBI [30]. In this regard, the Brain Trauma Foundation (BTF) guidelines recommend maintaining SAP at 100 mmHg for patients 50–69 years old or 110 mmHg or above for patients 15–49 or > 70 years old [17]. The European guidelines regarding the management of major hemorrhage and coagulopathy in polytrauma patients recommend maintaining MAP ≥ 80 mmHg in the case of severe TBI (grade 1C) [10]. Considering the above, we recommend maintaining SAP > 110 mmHg or MAP > 80 mmHg in severe isolated TBI patients. In the case of invasive ABP monitoring, we suggest that the arterial transducer should be zeroed at the level of the tragus according to the joint position statement by the councils of the Neuroanaesthesia and Critical Care Society of Great Britain and Ireland (NACCS) and the Society of British Neurological Surgeons (SBNS) [31]. About this, some panelists have expressed concerns. Specifically, zeroing the transducer at the level of the tragus and maintaining head of the bed elevated at 30°–45° (to facilitate brain venous drainage) could result in higher ABP values respect to zeroing made at the level of the heart. This is an interesting aspect requiring further research.

Pending the results of ongoing trials [“Transfusion Strategies in Acute Brain-Injured Patients (TRAIN)” study (NCT02968654) and the “HEMOglobin transfusion threshold in Traumatic brain Injury OptimizatioN: The HEMOTION Trial” (NCT03260478)] and according to guidelines/consensus [10, 29], we recommend maintaining Hb level > 7 g/dl in severe isolated TBI patients.

Hyponatremia can be detrimental for TBI patients at risk of intracranial hypertension and should be avoided [29, 32, 33]. In this regard, we recommend maintaining serum Na in the upper limit of the normal range.

Fever is a dangerous secondary insult for the injured brain associated with worse neurological outcome [34]. The optimal threshold to start antipyretics therapy in TBI has not yet been established [35]. Considering the gradient between core and brain temperature (brain > core) [36], we recommend avoiding core body temperature > 37.5 °C and to aim for normothermia.

Coagulation management

Coagulopathy, associated with TBI or with previously administered drugs, is frequently encountered after head injury, and the consequent progression of intracranial mass lesions is often associated with unfavorable neurological outcome [37,38,39,40]. The rapid correction of trauma- or medication-induced coagulopathy is very important, especially for patients needing urgent neurosurgical procedures. Whether the management of hemostatic abnormalities after TBI can protect against secondary brain injury and improve neurological outcomes remains elusive [41]; no specific guidelines regarding coagulation management in TBI patients have been published to date. Basic coagulation parameters suggested for neurosurgery are: PLT count > 75.000 or 100.000/mm3 and PT/aPTT < 1.5 the normal control values [10, 42, 43]. The utilization of POC tests, such as TEG and ROTEM, may be useful to personalize therapy in this setting and in the case of utilization of antiplatelets drugs and/or direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) [44]. Our recommendations are in agreement with the above. We are aware that POC tests are not available worldwide. Their use can be considered, but without significantly delay the transfer. Some panelists suggested a PLT count > 100.000/mm3 compared with > 75.000 mm3; in this regard, the optimal cut-off for TBI patients at risk of needing neurosurgery has yet to be established. According to some panelists, reversal of antiplatelets/anticoagulants drugs should be started immediately prior to neurosurgery and for others, optimization of coagulation should not delay the transfer too much and could even be done “en route.” We suggest readers to refer to the “Guideline for Reversal of Antithrombotics in Intracranial Hemorrhage” of the Neurocritical Care Society (NCS) and the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) published in 2016 with the aim to provide timely and evidence-based reversal strategies for the care of patients with antithrombotic-associated intracranial hemorrhage [44].

Neuromonitoring

ICP monitoring is usually not available in spoke centers and during transfer to hub centers. However, different tools can help us to estimate the risk of intracranial hypertension. A basic neurological evaluation, including GCS and pupil examination (size and reaction), is very helpful to identify neurological deterioration associated with an increase of ICP [5, 45]. The motor response is the most easily evaluable component of the GCS (especially in conditions where verbal response and eye opening can be difficult to obtain, as in the case of tracheal intubation, facial injuries, etc.) [5, 45]. Pupillary shape/diameter and reactivity to light should be carefully evaluated [5, 46, 47]. These evaluations are essential before tracheal intubation and sedation. However, discontinuation of sedation to obtain a reliable neurological evaluation can be dangerous in patients with radiological signs of increased ICP [48]. Although not specific, certain CT radiological signs are suggestive of intracranial hypertension such as the compression of the basal cisterns, midline shift and sulcal effacement [49, 50].

Brain ultrasonography, when performed by a skilled operator, can estimate intracranial hypertension by the evaluation of optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD), pulsatility index (PI), etc. [51].

Automated pupillometry accurately measures the pupil size and several dynamic variables such as pupillary constriction, latency and constriction/dilation velocity [51]. The integration of the latter into an algorithm provides the Neurological Pupil index (NPi—values 0–5; pathological < 3) [52]. Episodes of raised ICP are associated with a concomitant decrease of the NPi [52]. Considering the above, we recommend performing serial neurologic evaluations (GCS + pupil examination) in the spoke center and during transfer to the hub center to detect neuro-worsening in the absence of radiological signs of intracranial hypertension (i.e., midline shift, compression of the basal cisterns, sulcal effacement, etc.). In this scenario, only pupillary evaluation (shape/diameter and reactivity to light), especially during transfer, could be useful. We were unable to reach a consensus on the utilization of brain ultrasonography and automated pupillometry as a screening non-invasive tool for detection of intracranial hypertension in the spoke center. This could be related, at the moment, to the absence of robust data deriving from well-powered studies on this topic. The possible utilization of brain ultrasonography and automated pupillometry, by experienced operators, should not significantly delay the patient’s transfer.

Brain-focused therapy

The maintenance of the head of a severe isolated TBI patients in the midline, avoiding compression of the neck veins, and with a bed elevated at 30°–45° to facilitate brain venous drainage are basic maneuvers in the neurocritical care setting [29]. These should always be applied with adequate spine precautions. Some panelists emphasized as some patients may require a lower bed elevation; this, considering what has been said previously for the zeroing of the arterial transducer in the case of invasive ABP monitoring, could lead to a reduced use of vasopressors for maintaining the blood pressure target.

Osmotherapy (i.e., mannitol or hypertonic saline) is effective in the rapid control of ICP through a reduction in blood viscosity and an increase in plasma osmolarity [53]. Currently, adequately powered randomized controlled studies clearly showing the superiority of mannitol compared to hypertonic saline are lacking. Considering the diuretic effect of mannitol, hypertonic saline is a potentially reasonable choice in cases of hypovolemia [29]. Moreover, the early utilization of mannitol, but not hypertonic saline, seems to be associated with increased incidence of acute kidney injury [54].

Hypocapnia associated with hyperventilation results in cerebral vasoconstriction with a reduction in cerebral blood flow (CBF), cerebral blood volume and consequently ICP [28]. This temporary effect is associated with the risk of development of cerebral ischemia [55]. Profound hypocapnia is not recommended as a prophylactic maneuver but could be utilized briefly for patients awaiting emergent neurosurgery [17, 26].

Metabolic suppression with sedatives can be useful in the control of intracranial hypertension but can increase the risk of hypotension [56, 57]. The reduction in blood pressure, observed in this scenario, should be aggressively corrected. In this regard, ketamine could be a useful option, but more data are necessary to confirm this [58].

Considering the above, in patients with signs of intracranial hypertension/brain herniation awaiting emergent neurosurgery, we recommend osmotherapy, short-term hyperventilation and an increase in sedation (ensuring an acceptable ABP).

According to BTF guidelines [17], prophylactic phenytoin or valproate are not recommended for preventing late post-traumatic seizures (PTS) and phenytoin is recommended to decrease the incidence of early PTS (within 7 days of injury), when the overall benefit is thought to outweigh the complications associated with such treatment (early PTS have not been associated with worse outcomes). Considering the above and awaiting the results of the ongoing “Management of Seizure after Traumatic Brain Injury” (MAST) trial (NCT04573803), we were unable to provide any recommendations regarding seizure prophylaxis in severe isolated TBI patients.

Notes on the use of the current consensus

The aim of this consensus is to support clinicians’ decision making in the early management of isolated severe TBI patients admitted to a hospital without neurosurgical capabilities. The included statements are created to assist the physician’s clinical judgment, which is necessary to provide appropriate (personalized) therapy. Considering the lack of high-quality studies in this setting, we adopted a modified Delphi approach involving experts from different countries worldwide; this approach is less rigorous than evidence-based guidelines. However, we think that our methodology can provide useful recommendations for these challenging clinical scenarios. The practice guidelines promulgated in this work do not represent a standard of practice. They are suggested plans of care, based on the best available evidence and the consensus of experts, but they do not exclude other approaches as being within the standard of practice. Ultimately, responsibility for the results of treatment rests with those who are directly engaged therein, and not with the consensus group.

Conclusions

Future studies should be encouraged to improve clinical outcomes for patients with severe TBI who do not have immediate access to neurosurgical care. This international multidisciplinary consensus conference was aimed to provide practical recommendations to deliver the best early possible care of severe isolated TBI patients admitted to a spoke center (without neurosurgical capabilities) and during the transfer to the hub center (with neurosurgical capabilities).

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Change history

Abbreviations

TBI:

Traumatic brain injury

WSES:

World Society of Emergency Surgery

ICU:

Intensive care unit

OR:

Operating room

CT:

Computed tomography

GCS:

Glasgow Coma Scale

ICP:

Intracranial pressure

ABP:

Arterial blood pressure

ECG:

Electrocardiogram

HR:

Heart rate

SpO2 :

Peripheral oxygen saturation

ETCO2 :

End-tidal carbon dioxide

SAP:

Systolic arterial pressure

MAP:

Mean arterial pressure

PLT:

Platelet

PT:

Prothrombin time

aPTT:

Activated partial thromboplastin time

POC:

Point-of-care

TEG:

Thromboelastography

ROTEM:

Rotational thromboelastometry

EEG:

Electroencephalogram

Hb:

Hemoglobin

PaCO2 :

Arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide

Na:

Sodium

aSAH:

Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage

NIABP:

Non-invasive arterial blood pressure

BTF:

Brain Trauma Foundation

NACCS:

Neuroanaesthesia and Critical Care Society of Great Britain and Ireland

SBNS:

Society of British Neurological Surgeons

TRAIN:

Transfusion Strategies in Acute Brain-Injured Patients

DOACs:

Direct oral anticoagulants

NCS:

Neurocritical Care Society

SCCM:

Society of Critical Care Medicine

ONSD:

Optic nerve sheath diameter

PI:

Pulsatility index

NPi:

Neurological Pupil index

CBF:

Cerebral blood flow

PTS:

Post-traumatic seizures

MAST:

Management of Seizure after Traumatic Brain Injury

References

  1. Meyfroidt G, Bouzat P, Casaer MP, Chesnut R, Hamada SR, Helbok R, Hutchinson P, Maas AIR, Manley G, Menon DK, Newcombe VFJ, Oddo M, Robba C, Shutter L, Smith M, Steyerberg EW, Stocchetti N, Taccone FS, Wilson L, Zanier ER, Citerio G. Management of moderate to severe traumatic brain injury: an update for the intensivist. Intensive Care Med. 2022;48(6):649–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. GBD 2016 Traumatic Brain Injury and Spinal Cord Injury Collaborators. Global, regional, and national burden of traumatic brain injury and spinal cord injury, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet Neurol. 2019;18(1):56–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Picetti E, Bouzat P, Cattani L, Taccone FS. Perioperative management of severe brain injured patients. Minerva Anestesiol. 2022;88(5):380–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Newcombe VFJ, Chow A. The features of the typical traumatic brain injury patient in the ICU are changing: what will this mean for the intensivist? Curr Opin Crit Care. 2021;27(2):80–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Stocchetti N, Carbonara M, Citerio G, Ercole A, Skrifvars MB, Smielewski P, Zoerle T, Menon DK. Severe traumatic brain injury: targeted management in the intensive care unit. Lancet Neurol. 2017;16(6):452–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. McConnell KJ, Newgard CD, Mullins RJ, Arthur M, Hedges JR. Mortality benefit of transfer to level I versus level II trauma centers for head-injured patients. Health Serv Res. 2005;40(2):435–57.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. DuBose JJ, Browder T, Inaba K, Teixeira PG, Chan LS, Demetriades D. Effect of trauma center designation on outcome in patients with severe traumatic brain injury. Arch Surg. 2008;143(12):1213–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Härtl R, Gerber LM, Iacono L, Ni Q, Lyons K, Ghajar J. Direct transport within an organized state trauma system reduces mortality in patients with severe traumatic brain injury. J Trauma. 2006;60(6):1250–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Sewalt CA, Gravesteijn BY, Menon D, Lingsma HF, Maas AIR, Stocchetti N, Venema E, Lecky FE, CENTER TBI Participants and Investigators. Primary versus early secondary referral to a specialized neurotrauma center in patients with moderate/severe traumatic brain injury: a CENTER TBI study. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2021;29(1):113.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Spahn DR, Bouillon B, Cerny V, Duranteau J, Filipescu D, Hunt BJ, Komadina R, Maegele M, Nardi G, Riddez L, Samama CM, Vincent JL, Rossaint R. The European guideline on management of major bleeding and coagulopathy following trauma: fifth edition. Crit Care. 2019;23(1):98.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Picetti E, Rossi S, Abu-Zidan FM, Ansaloni L, Armonda R, Baiocchi GL, Bala M, Balogh ZJ, Berardino M, Biffl WL, Bouzat P, Buki A, Ceresoli M, Chesnut RM, Chiara O, Citerio G, Coccolini F, Coimbra R, Di Saverio S, Fraga GP, Gupta D, Helbok R, Hutchinson PJ, Kirkpatrick AW, Kinoshita T, Kluger Y, Leppaniemi A, Maas AIR, Maier RV, Minardi F, Moore EE, Myburgh JA, Okonkwo DO, Otomo Y, Rizoli S, Rubiano AM, Sahuquillo J, Sartelli M, Scalea TM, Servadei F, Stahel PF, Stocchetti N, Taccone FS, Tonetti T, Velmahos G, Weber D, Catena F. WSES consensus conference guidelines: monitoring and management of severe adult traumatic brain injury patients with polytrauma in the first 24 hours. World J Emerg Surg. 2019;29(14):53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Rubiano AM, Griswold DP, Jibaja M, Rabinstein AA, Godoy DA. Management of severe traumatic brain injury in regions with limited resources. Brain Inj. 2021;35(11):1317–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rubiano AM, Vera DS, Montenegro JH, Carney N, Clavijo A, Carreño JN, Gutierrez O, Mejia J, Ciro JD, Barrios ND, Soto AR, Tejada PA, Zerpa MC, Gomez A, Navarrete N, Echeverry O, Umaña M, Restrepo CM, Castillo JL, Sanabria OA, Bravo MP, Gomez CM, Godoy DA, Orjuela GD, Arias AA, Echeverri RA, Paranos J. Recommendations of the Colombian Consensus Committee for the management of traumatic brain injury in prehospital, emergency department, surgery, and intensive care (Beyond one option for treatment of traumatic brain injury: a stratified protocol [BOOTStraP]). J Neurosci Rural Pract. 2020;11(1):7–22.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Chesnut RM, Temkin N, Videtta W, Petroni G, Lujan S, Pridgeon J, Dikmen S, Chaddock K, Barber J, Machamer J, Guadagnoli N, Hendrickson P, Aguilera S, Alanis V, Bello Quezada ME, Bautista Coronel E, Bustamante LA, Cacciatori AC, Carricondo CJ, Carvajal F, Davila R, Dominguez M, Figueroa Melgarejo JA, Fillipi MM, Godoy DA, Gomez DC, Lacerda Gallardo AJ, Guerra Garcia JA, Zerain GF, Lavadenz Cuientas LA, Lequipe C, Grajales Yuca GV, Jibaja Vega M, Kessler ME, López Delgado HJ, Sandi Lora F, Mazzola AM, Maldonado RM, Mezquia de Pedro N, Martínez Zubieta JR, Mijangos Méndez JC, Mora J, Ochoa Parra JM, Pahnke PB, Paranhos J, Piñero GR, Rivadeneira Pilacuán FA, Mendez Rivera MN, Romero Figueroa RL, Rubiano AM, Saraguro Orozco AM, Silesky Jiménez JI, Silva Naranjo L, Soler Morejon C, Urbina Z. Consensus-based management protocol (CREVICE Protocol) for the treatment of severe traumatic brain injury based on imaging and clinical examination for use when intracranial pressure monitoring is not employed. J Neurotrauma. 2020;37(11):1291–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Bullock MR, Chesnut R, Ghajar J, Gordon D, Hartl R, Newell DW, Servadei F, Walters B, Wilberger JE, Surgical Management of Traumatic Brain Injury Author Group. Guidelines for the surgical management of traumatic brain injury. Neurosurgery. 2006;58(suppl):S1-62.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Stocchetti N, Picetti E, Berardino M, Buki A, Chesnut RM, Fountas KN, Horn P, Hutchinson PJ, Iaccarino C, Kolias AG, Koskinen LO, Latronico N, Maas AI, Payen JF, Rosenthal G, Sahuquillo J, Signoretti S, Soustiel JF, Servadei F. Clinical applications of intracranial pressure monitoring in traumatic brain injury: report of the Milan consensus conference. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2014;156(8):1615–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Carney N, Totten AM, O’Reilly C, Ullman JS, Hawryluk GW, Bell MJ, Bratton SL, Chesnut R, Harris OA, Kissoon N, Rubiano AM, Shutter L, Tasker RC, Vavilala MS, Wilberger J, Wright DW, Ghajar J. Guidelines for the management of severe traumatic brain injury, fourth edition. Neurosurgery. 2017;80(1):6–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hutchinson PJ, Kolias AG, Tajsic T, Adeleye A, Aklilu AT, Apriawan T, Bajamal AH, Barthélemy EJ, Devi BI, Bhat D, Bulters D, Chesnut R, Citerio G, Cooper DJ, Czosnyka M, Edem I, El-Ghandour NMF, Figaji A, Fountas KN, Gallagher C, Hawryluk GWJ, Iaccarino C, Joseph M, Khan T, Laeke T, Levchenko O, Liu B, Liu W, Maas A, Manley GT, Manson P, Mazzeo AT, Menon DK, Michael DB, Muehlschlegel S, Okonkwo DO, Park KB, Rosenfeld JV, Rosseau G, Rubiano AM, Shabani HK, Stocchetti N, Timmons SD, Timofeev I, Uff C, Ullman JS, Valadka A, Waran V, Wells A, Wilson MH, Servadei F. Consensus statement from the international consensus meeting on the role of decompressive craniectomy in the management of traumatic brain injury: consensus statement. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2019;161(7):1261–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hawryluk GWJ, Rubiano AM, Totten AM, O’Reilly C, Ullman JS, Bratton SL, Chesnut R, Harris OA, Kissoon N, Shutter L, Tasker RC, Vavilala MS, Wilberger J, Wright DW, Lumba-Brown A, Ghajar J. Guidelines for the management of severe traumatic brain injury: 2020 update of the decompressive craniectomy recommendations. Neurosurgery. 2020;87(3):427–34.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Pham X, Ray J, Neto AS, Laing J, Perucca P, Kwan P, O’Brien TJ, Udy AA. Association of Neurocritical care services with mortality and functional outcomes for adults with brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Neurol. 2022;79(10):1049–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Nathanson MH, Andrzejowski J, Dinsmore J, Eynon CA, Ferguson K, Hooper T, Kashyap A, Kendall J, McCormack V, Shinde S, Smith A, Thomas E. Guidelines for safe transfer of the brain-injured patient: trauma and stroke, 2019: guidelines from the Association of Anaesthetists and the Neuro Anaesthesia and Critical Care Society. Anaesthesia. 2020;75(2):234–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Johnson A, Rott M, Kuchler A, Williams E, Cole F, Ramzy A, Barbosa R, Long W, Martin MJ. Direct to operating room trauma resuscitation: optimizing patient selection and time-critical outcomes when minutes count. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2020;89(1):160–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kreutzer J, Akutsu H, Fahlbusch R, Buchfelder M, Nimsky C. Teleradiology in neurosurgery: experience in 1024 cases. J Telemed Telecare. 2008;14(2):67–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Iaccarino C, Rapana’ A, Compagnone C, Tagliaferri F, Servadei F. Teleradiology for traumatic brain injury management. In: Kumar S, Krupinski EA, editors. Teleradiology. Berlin: Springer; 2008. p. 181–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78871-3_15.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Picetti E, Berardino M, Bertuccio A, Bertuetti R, Boccardi EP, Caricato A, Castioni CA, Cenzato M, Chieregato A, Citerio G, Gritti P, Longhi L, Martino C, Munari M, Rossi S, Stocchetti N, Zoerle T, Rasulo F, Robba C. Early management of patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage in a hospital without neurosurgical/neuroendovascular facilities: a consensus and clinical recommendations of the Italian Society of Anesthesia and Intensive Care (SIAARTI). J Anesth Analg Crit Care. 2021;1:10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Robba C, Poole D, McNett M, Asehnoune K, Bösel J, Bruder N, Chieregato A, Cinotti R, Duranteau J, Einav S, Ercole A, Ferguson N, Guerin C, Siempos II, Kurtz P, Juffermans NP, Mancebo J, Mascia L, McCredie V, Nin N, Oddo M, Pelosi P, Rabinstein AA, Neto AS, Seder DB, Skrifvars MB, Suarez JI, Taccone FS, van der Jagt M, Citerio G, Stevens RD. Mechanical ventilation in patients with acute brain injury: recommendations of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine consensus. Intensive Care Med. 2020;46(12):2397–410.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Murray GD, Butcher I, McHugh GS, Lu J, Mushkudiani NA, Maas AI, Marmarou A, Steyerberg EW. Multivariable prognostic analysis in traumatic brain injury: results from the IMPACT study. J Neurotrauma. 2007;24(2):329–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Stocchetti N, Maas AI, Chieregato A, van der Plas AA. Hyperventilation in head injury: a review. Chest. 2005;127(5):1812–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Hawryluk GWJ, Aguilera S, Buki A, Bulger E, Citerio G, Cooper DJ, Arrastia RD, Diringer M, Figaji A, Gao G, Geocadin R, Ghajar J, Harris O, Hoffer A, Hutchinson P, Joseph M, Kitagawa R, Manley G, Mayer S, Menon DK, Meyfroidt G, Michael DB, Oddo M, Okonkwo D, Patel M, Robertson C, Rosenfeld JV, Rubiano AM, Sahuquillo J, Servadei F, Shutter L, Stein D, Stocchetti N, Taccone FS, Timmons S, Tsai E, Ullman JS, Vespa P, Videtta W, Wright DW, Zammit C, Chesnut RM. A management algorithm for patients with intracranial pressure monitoring: the Seattle International Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Consensus Conference (SIBICC). Intensive Care Med. 2019;45(12):1783–94.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Chesnut RM, Marshall LF, Klauber MR, Blunt BA, Baldwin N, Eisenberg HM, Jane JA, Marmarou A, Foulkes MA. The role of secondary brain injury in determining outcome from severe head injury. J Trauma. 1993;34(2):216–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Thomas E; NACCS, Czosnyka M, Hutchinson P; SBNS. Calculation of cerebral perfusion pressure in the management of traumatic brain injury: joint position statement by the councils of the Neuroanaesthesia and Critical Care Society of Great Britain and Ireland (NACCS) and the Society of British Neurological Surgeons (SBNS). Br J Anaesth. 2015;115(4):487–8.

  32. Adrogué HJ, Tucker BM, Madias NE. Diagnosis and management of hyponatremia: a review. JAMA. 2022;328(3):280–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Diringer MN, Zazulia AR. Hyponatremia in neurologic patients: consequences and approaches to treatment. Neurologist. 2006;12(3):117–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Greer DM, Funk SE, Reaven NL, Ouzounelli M, Uman GC. Impact of fever on outcome in patients with stroke and neurologic injury: a comprehensive meta-analysis. Stroke. 2008;39(11):3029–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Picetti E, Oddo M, Prisco L, Helbok R, Taccone FS. A survey on fever monitoring and management in patients with acute brain injury: the SUMMA study. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol. 2019;31(4):399–405.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Rossi S, Zanier ER, Mauri I, Columbo A, Stocchetti N. Brain temperature, body core temperature, and intracranial pressure in acute cerebral damage. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2001;71(4):448–54.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Allard CB, Scarpelini S, Rhind SG, Baker AJ, Shek PN, Tien H, Fernando M, Tremblay L, Morrison LJ, Pinto R, Rizoli SB. Abnormal coagulation tests are associated with progression of traumatic intracranial hemorrhage. J Trauma. 2009;67(5):959–67.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Schnüriger B, Inaba K, Abdelsayed GA, Lustenberger T, Eberle BM, Barmparas G, Talving P, Demetriades D. The impact of platelets on the progression of traumatic intracranial hemorrhage. J Trauma. 2010;68(4):881–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Joseph B, Pandit V, Meyer D, Butvidas L, Kulvatunyou N, Khalil M, Tang A, Zangbar B, O’Keeffe T, Gries L, Friese RS, Rhee P. The significance of platelet count in traumatic brain injury patients on antiplatelet therapy. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014;77(3):417–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Yuan Q, Sun YR, Wu X, Yu J, Li ZQ, Du ZY, Wu XH, Zhou LF, Hu J. Coagulopathy in traumatic brain injury and its correlation with progressive hemorrhagic injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neurotrauma. 2016;33(14):1279–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Maegele M. Coagulopathy and progression of intracranial hemorrhage in traumatic brain injury: mechanisms, impact, and therapeutic considerations. Neurosurgery. 2021;89(6):954–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Hess AS, Ramamoorthy J, Hess JR. Perioperative platelet transfusions. Anesthesiology. 2021;134(3):471–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. TQIP A. Best practices in the management of traumatic brain injury. ACS Committee on Trauma; 2015. p. 3–23.

  44. Frontera JA, Lewin JJ 3rd, Rabinstein AA, Aisiku IP, Alexandrov AW, Cook AM, del Zoppo GJ, Kumar MA, Peerschke EI, Stiefel MF, Teitelbaum JS, Wartenberg KE, Zerfoss CL. Guideline for reversal of antithrombotics in intracranial hemorrhage: a statement for healthcare professionals from the Neurocritical Care Society and Society of Critical Care Medicine. Neurocrit Care. 2016;24(1):6–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Teasdale G, Maas A, Lecky F, Manley G, Stocchetti N, Murray G. The Glasgow Coma Scale at 40 years: standing the test of time. Lancet Neurol. 2014;13(8):844–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Marmarou A, Lu J, Butcher I, McHugh GS, Murray GD, Steyerberg EW, Mushkudiani NA, Choi S, Maas AI. Prognostic value of the Glasgow Coma Scale and pupil reactivity in traumatic brain injury assessed pre-hospital and on enrollment: an IMPACT analysis. J Neurotrauma. 2007;24(2):270–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Adoni A, McNett M. The pupillary response in traumatic brain injury: a guide for trauma nurses. J Trauma Nurs. 2007;14(4):191–6 (quiz 197–8).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Helbok R, Kurtz P, Schmidt MJ, Stuart MR, Fernandez L, Connolly SE, Lee K, Schmutzhard E, Mayer SA, Claassen J, Badjatia N. Effects of the neurological wake-up test on clinical examination, intracranial pressure, brain metabolism and brain tissue oxygenation in severely brain-injured patients. Crit Care. 2012;16(6):R226.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Miller MT, Pasquale M, Kurek S, White J, Martin P, Bannon K, Wasser T, Li M. Initial head computed tomographic scan characteristics have a linear relationship with initial intracranial pressure after trauma. J Trauma. 2004;56(5):967–72 (discussion 972–3).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Schweitzer AD, Niogi SN, Whitlow CT, Tsiouris AJ. Traumatic brain injury: imaging patterns and complications. Radiographics. 2019;39(6):1571–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Robba C, Goffi A, Geeraerts T, Cardim D, Via G, Czosnyka M, Park S, Sarwal A, Padayachy L, Rasulo F, Citerio G. Brain ultrasonography: methodology, basic and advanced principles and clinical applications. A narrative review. Intensive Care Med. 2019;45(7):913–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Sandroni C, Citerio G, Taccone FS. Automated pupillometry in intensive care. Intensive Care Med. 2022;48(10):1467–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Ropper AH. Hyperosmolar therapy for raised intracranial pressure. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:746–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Skrifvars MB, Bailey M, Moore E, Mårtensson J, French C, Presneill J, Nichol A, Little L, Duranteau J, Huet O, Haddad S, Arabi YM, McArthur C, Cooper DJ, Bendel S, Bellomo R, Erythropoietin in Traumatic Brain Injury (EPO-TBI) Investigators and the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society (ANZICS) Clinical Trials Group. A post hoc analysis of osmotherapy use in the erythropoietin in traumatic brain injury study-associations with acute kidney injury and mortality. Crit Care Med. 2021;49(4):e394–403.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Coles JP, Fryer TD, Coleman MR, Smielewski P, Gupta AK, Minhas PS, Aigbirhio F, Chatfield DA, Williams GB, Boniface S, Carpenter TA, Clark JC, Pickard JD, Menon DK. Hyperventilation following head injury: effect on ischemic burden and cerebral oxidative metabolism. Crit Care Med. 2007;35(2):568–78.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Oddo M, Crippa IA, Mehta S, Menon D, Payen JF, Taccone FS, Citerio G. Optimizing sedation in patients with acute brain injury. Crit Care. 2016;20(1):128.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Schalén W, Messeter K, Nordström CH. Complications and side effects during thiopentone therapy in patients with severe head injuries. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1992;36(4):369–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Godoy DA, Badenes R, Pelosi P, Robba C. Ketamine in acute phase of severe traumatic brain injury “an old drug for new uses?” Crit Care. 2021;25(1):19.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank WSES for the support.

Funding

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Parma University Hospital, Parma, Italy

    Edoardo Picetti

  2. Department of General and Emergency Surgery, Bufalini Hospital, Cesena, Italy

    Fausto Catena

  3. The Research Office, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, United Arab Emirates University, Al-Ain, United Arab Emirates

    Fikri Abu-Zidan

  4. Unit of General Surgery, San Matteo Hospital Pavia, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy

    Luca Ansaloni

  5. Department of Neurosurgery, 71541MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA

    Rocco A. Armonda

  6. Department of Neurosurgery, 8405MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC, USA

    Rocco A. Armonda

  7. Acute Care Surgery and Trauma Unit, Department of General Surgery, Hadassah Medical Center and Faculty of Medicine, Hebrew University of Jerusalem Kiriat Hadassah, Jerusalem, Israel

    Miklosh Bala

  8. Department of Traumatology, John Hunter Hospital, Hunter Medical Research Institute and University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia

    Zsolt J. Balogh

  9. Department of Neurosurgery, SS Antonio E Biagio E Cesare Arrigo Alessandria Hospital, Alessandria, Italy

    Alessandro Bertuccio

  10. Scripps Clinic Medical Group, La Jolla, CA, USA

    Walt L. Biffl

  11. Inserm, U1216, CHU Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble Institut Neurosciences, Université Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble, France

    Pierre Bouzat

  12. Department of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden

    Andras Buki

  13. Neuroradiology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria of Parma, Parma, Italy

    Davide Cerasti

  14. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

    Randall M. Chesnut

  15. Department of Orthopedics and Sports Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

    Randall M. Chesnut

  16. Department of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

    Randall M. Chesnut

  17. School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza, Italy

    Giuseppe Citerio

  18. Neuroscience Department, NeuroIntensive Care Unit, Hospital San Gerardo, ASST Monza, Monza, Italy

    Giuseppe Citerio

  19. Department of Emergency and Trauma Surgery, Pisa University Hospital, Pisa, Italy

    Federico Coccolini

  20. Riverside University Health System Medical Center, Loma Linda University School of Medicine, Riverside, CA, USA

    Raul Coimbra

  21. Department of Anesthesia, Intensive Care and Prehospital Emergency, Ospedale Maggiore Carlo Alberto Pizzardi, Bologna, Italy

    Carlo Coniglio

  22. Neuroradiology Unit, Department of Experimental and Clinical Biomedical Sciences, University of Florence, Florence, Italy

    Enrico Fainardi

  23. Department of Neurosurgery, Neurosciences Centre and JPN Apex Trauma Centre, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India

    Deepak Gupta

  24. Department of Trauma, San Antonio Military Medical Center and the U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research, San Antonio, TX, 78234, USA

    Jennifer M. Gurney

  25. The Department of Defense Center of Excellence for Trauma, Joint Trauma System (JTS), JBSA Fort Sam Houston, San Antonio, TX, 78234, USA

    Jennifer M. Gurney

  26. Cleveland Clinic, 762 S. Cleveland-Massillon Rd, Akron, OH, 44333, USA

    Gregory W. J. Hawryluk

  27. Neurological Intensive Care Unit, Department of Neurology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria

    Raimund Helbok

  28. Department of Neurosurgery, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

    Peter J. A. Hutchinson

  29. Neurosurgery Unit, Department of Biomedical, Metabolic and Neural Sciences, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Modena, Modena, Italy

    Corrado Iaccarino

  30. National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Group on Neurotrauma, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

    Angelos Kolias

  31. Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Addenbrooke’s Hospital,, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

    Angelos Kolias

  32. Harborview Medical Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

    Ronald W. Maier

  33. Division of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, Los Angeles County + USC Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Matthew J. Martin

  34. Department of Intensive Care, University Hospitals Leuven, Louvain, Belgium

    Geert Meyfroidt

  35. Laboratory of Intensive Care Medicine, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Louvain, Belgium

    Geert Meyfroidt

  36. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    David O. Okonkwo

  37. Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Emergency, Spedali Civili University Hospital, Brescia, Italy

    Frank Rasulo

  38. Surgery Department, Section of Trauma Surgery, Hamad General Hospital (HGH), Doha, Qatar

    Sandro Rizoli

  39. INUB-MEDITECH Research Group, Institute of Neurosciences, Universidad El Bosque, Bogotá, Colombia

    Andres Rubiano

  40. Department of Neurosurgery, Vall d’Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

    Juan Sahuquillo

  41. Trauma Critical Care and Acute Care Surgery, Air Force Center for Sustainment of Trauma and Readiness Skills, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA

    Valerie G. Sams

  42. Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy

    Franco Servadei

  43. Department of Neurosurgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy

    Franco Servadei

  44. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine and Neurological Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

    Deepak Sharma

  45. Department of Critical Care Medicine, UPMC/University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Lori Shutter

  46. College of Osteopathic Medicine, Rocky Vista University, Parker, CO, USA

    Philip F. Stahel

  47. Department of Intensive Care, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium

    Fabio S. Taccone

  48. Department of Intensive Care and Hyperbaric Medicine, The Alfred, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia

    Andrew Udy

  49. Department of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, University of Milan, Milan, Italy

    Tommaso Zoerle

  50. Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Emergency, Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy

    Tommaso Zoerle

  51. Anesthesia and Intensive Care Unit, AUSL Romagna, M. Bufalini Hospital, Cesena, Italy

    Vanni Agnoletti

  52. Healthcare Administration, Santa Maria Delle Croci Hospital, Ravenna, Italy

    Francesca Bravi

  53. Department of General, Digestive and Metabolic Minimally Invasive Surgery, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal De Poissy/St Germain en Laye, Poissy, France

    Belinda De Simone

  54. Department of General Surgery, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel

    Yoram Kluger

  55. Department of Anesthesiology and Acute Care, Umberto I Hospital of Lugo, Ausl Della Romagna, Lugo, Italy

    Costanza Martino

  56. Ernest E Moore Shock Trauma Center at Denver Health, University of Colorado, Denver, CO, USA

    Ernest E. Moore

  57. Department of Surgery, Macerata Hospital, Macerata, Italy

    Massimo Sartelli

  58. Department of General Surgery, Royal Perth Hospital, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia

    Dieter Weber

  59. Anesthesia and Intensive Care, San Martino Policlinico Hospital, IRCCS for Oncology and Neuroscience, Genoa, Italy

    Chiara Robba

  60. Department of Surgical Sciences and Integrated Sciences, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy

    Chiara Robba

Authors
  1. Edoardo Picetti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fausto Catena
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fikri Abu-Zidan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Luca Ansaloni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Rocco A. Armonda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Miklosh Bala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Zsolt J. Balogh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Alessandro Bertuccio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Walt L. Biffl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Pierre Bouzat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Andras Buki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Davide Cerasti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Randall M. Chesnut
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Giuseppe Citerio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Federico Coccolini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Raul Coimbra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Carlo Coniglio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Enrico Fainardi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Deepak Gupta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  20. Jennifer M. Gurney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  21. Gregory W. J. Hawryluk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  22. Raimund Helbok
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  23. Peter J. A. Hutchinson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  24. Corrado Iaccarino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  25. Angelos Kolias
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  26. Ronald W. Maier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  27. Matthew J. Martin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  28. Geert Meyfroidt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  29. David O. Okonkwo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  30. Frank Rasulo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  31. Sandro Rizoli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  32. Andres Rubiano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  33. Juan Sahuquillo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  34. Valerie G. Sams
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  35. Franco Servadei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  36. Deepak Sharma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  37. Lori Shutter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  38. Philip F. Stahel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  39. Fabio S. Taccone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  40. Andrew Udy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  41. Tommaso Zoerle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  42. Vanni Agnoletti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  43. Francesca Bravi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  44. Belinda De Simone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  45. Yoram Kluger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  46. Costanza Martino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  47. Ernest E. Moore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  48. Massimo Sartelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  49. Dieter Weber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  50. Chiara Robba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

EP, CR and FC have designed the study. CR has performed acquisition of data. CR has done the analysis and interpretation of data. EP, CR and FC have drafted the article. All authors have revised it critically for important intellectual content. All authors read and approval the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Edoardo Picetti.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

None to declare.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The original online version of this article was revised: the author name in the author group Gregory W. J. Hawryluk has been misspelled and now it has been corrected.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1. Appendix 1.

Consensus participants.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Picetti, E., Catena, F., Abu-Zidan, F. et al. Early management of isolated severe traumatic brain injury patients in a hospital without neurosurgical capabilities: a consensus and clinical recommendations of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES). World J Emerg Surg 18, 5 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13017-022-00468-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13017-022-00468-2

Keywords

World Journal of Emergency Surgery

ISSN: 1749-7922