Intracranial pressure changes during continuous renal replacement therapy in acute period of severe traumatic brain injury

   The objective was to study the effect of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) in the acute period of traumatic brain injury (TBI) on intracranial pressure (ICP).
   Materials and methods. An analysis of the dynamics of ICP during CRRT in patients with severe TBI was performed. The division of procedures into three groups, depending on the variant of ICP change, allowed to perform a comparative analysis of a number of factors that were potential predictors of aggravation of intracranial hypertension.

   Results. During CRRT, ICP decreased in 39 % of cases (Group 1) and increased in 29 % of cases (Group 2). In 32 % of cases (Group 3), ICP did not change significantly during the procedure. The initial sodium level and the degree of sodium decrease during the first 6 hours of the procedure
differed between the groups, which turned out to be significantly higher in the group 2. An inverse correlation was found between the change in sodium level during the first 6 hours of the procedure and the change in ICP.
   Conclusions. CRRT in the acute period of severe TBI can be associated with both a decrease and increase of ICP. The main risk factor for worsening intracranial hypertension during CRRT is hypernatremia.

1. Davenport A. Renal replacement therapy in the patient with acute brain injury // Am J Kidney Dis. – 2001. – Vol. 37, № 3. – P. 457–466. PMID: 11228168.

2. Fletcher J. J., Bergman K., Carlson G. et al. Continuous renal replacement therapy for refractory intracranial hypertension? // J Trauma. – 2010. – Vol. 6, № 6. – P. 1506–9. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3181dbbf1b.

3. Fletcher J. J., Bergman K., Feucht E. C. et al. Continuous renal replacement therapy for refractory intracranial hypertension // Neurocrit Care. – 2009. – Vol. 11, № 1. – P. 101–105. doi: 10.1007/s12028-009-9197-9.

4. Freeman W. D., Wadei H. M. A brain-kidney connection: the delicate interplay of brain and kidney physiology // Neurocrit Care. – 2015. – Vol. 22, № 2. – P. 173–5. doi: 10.1007/s12028-015-0119-8.

5. Fülöp T., Zsom L., Rodríguez R. D. et al. Therapeutic hypernatremia management during continuous renal replacement therapy with elevated intracranial pressures and respiratory failure // Rev Endocr Metab Disord. – 2019. – Vol. 20, № 1. – P. 65–75. doi: 10.1007/s11154-019-09483-2.

6. Li N., Zhao W. G., Zhang W. F. Acute kidney injury in patients with severe traumatic brain injury: implementation of the acute kidney injury network stage system // Neurocrit Care. – 2011. – Vol. 14, № 3. – P. 377–81. doi: 10.1007/s12028-011-9511-1.

7. Martinez-Gonzalez E., Garcia-Olmo D., Mayordomo-Aranda E. et al. Does hemofiltration protect the brain after head trauma? An experimental study in rabbits // Intensive Care Med Exp. – 2020. – Vol. 8, № 1. – P. 66. doi: 10.1186/s40635-020-00357-5.

8. Medow J. E., Sanghvi S. R., Hofmann R. M. Use of high-flow continuous renal replacement therapy with citrate anticoagulation to control intracranial pressure by maintaining hypernatremia in a patient with acute brain injury and renal failure // Clin Med Res. – 2015. – Vol. 2. – P. 89–93. doi: 10.3121/cmr.2014.1238.

9. Osgood M., Compton R., Carandang R. et al. Rapid unexpected brain herniation in association with renal replacement therapy in acute brain injury: caution in the neurocritical care unit // Neurocrit Care. – 2015. – Vol. 2. – P. 176–83. doi: 10.1007/s12028-014-0064-y.

10. Schmidt O. I., Heyde C. E., Ertel W. et al. Closed head injury – an inflammatory disease? // Brain Res Brain Res Rev. – 2005. – Vol. 48, № 2. – P. 388–99. doi: 10.1016/j.brainresrev.2004.12.028.

11. Tuchman S., Khademian Z. P., Mistry K. Dialysis disequilibrium syndrome occurring during continuous renal replacement therapy // Clin Kidney J. – 2013. – Vol. 6, № 5. – P. 526–529. doi: 10.1093/ckj/sft087.

12. Zygun D. A., Kortbeek J. B., Fick G. H. et al. Non-neurologic organ dysfunction in severe traumatic brain injury // Crit Care Med. – 2005. – Vol. 33, № 3. – P. 654–60. doi: 10.1097/01.ccm.0000155911.01844.54.