Neurol Clin 26 (2008) 409–426

Management of Traumatic Brain Injury

in the Intensive Care Unit
Geoffrey S.F. Ling, MD, PhDa,b,*,
Scott A. Marshall, MDa,b
a
Department of Neurology, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences,
4301 Jones Bridge Road, Bethesda, MD 21042, USA
b
Neurosciences Critical Care, Johns Hopkins Hospital, 600 N. Wolfe Street,
Baltimore, MD, USA

Within the medical and scientific communities, traumatic brain injury

(TBI) has long been recognized as the leading cause of traumatic death
and disability. In the United States, a brain injury occurs every 7 seconds
and results in death every 5 minutes. This results in approximately 52,000
patients dying from TBI each year and accounts for almost one third of
all trauma-related deaths. Most of these injuries are a direct result of falls,
motor vehicle accidents, and assaults. The cost for direct TBI medical care is
estimated at more than $56 billion per year [1,2]. The rising numbers of mil-
itary patients injured while serving in Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and
Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) in Afghanistan will increase these es-
timates. Most victims of civilian and military TBI are younger men [3,4].
The long-term burden of TBI in human and financial terms is staggering.
Currently, the number of TBI survivors is numbered in the millions and is
growing. Many require extended rehabilitation. Because many of these pa-
tients are less than 40 years old when injured and are otherwise in good
physical health, they can live for decades, even if severely injured. The soci-
etal cost is large both in terms of direct care and lost productivity. A TBI
patient who was a potentially productive member of society now becomes
a consumer of services and chronic care resources. Further, this occurs in
the period of life when his or her contribution to society may be greatest

The opinions expressed in this work belong solely to those of the authors. They do not
and should not be interpreted as being representative or endorsed by the Uniformed Services
University, US Army, Department of Defense, or any other agency of the federal govern-
ment.
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: gling@usuhs.mil (G.S.F. Ling).

0733-8619/08/$ - see front matter. Published by Elsevier Inc.

doi:10.1016/j.ncl.2008.02.001 neurologic.theclinics.com
410 LING & MARSHALL

[3]. Even minor injury can lead to significant disability. Up to 79% of mild-
moderate TBI patients had residual symptoms 3 months after injury. Many
were unable to return to their jobs. Considering that the estimated total
number of new TBI cases is greater than 1.4 million per year in the United
States, the problem of brain injury is more fully appreciated [4,5].
Over the past 20 years, there has been marked improvement in the overall
mortality associated with TBI. The reasons for this decrease in mortality
may be attributed to improved medical and surgical care. A retrospective re-
view compared a database of severely injured traumatic head injury patients
from the period 1984 to 1987 with a similarly matched group from 1988 to
1996. There was a decrease in overall mortality, which remained significant
despite adjustment for age, motor score, and pupillary reaction. The overall
mortality from severe TBI in 1996 was reported as 27%, compared with
39% in 1984 [6]. The increasing role of specialized intensive care units
with neurologically trained medical and nursing providers using evidence-
based clinical management is believed to have had a favorable impact on
both the consistency and level of care. Advances in neuromonitoring, neuro-
imaging, and early aggressive neurosurgical interventions may also be im-
portant contributors to improved TBI outcome. Preventing and treating
comorbid conditions, such as venous thromboembolism, infection, and de-
cubitus ulcers, also likely had a positive role.
Historically, 15% to 20% of injuries incurred in battle involve the head
[7,8]. The available epidemiologic evidence suggests that this is true also
for casualties sustained in OIF and OEF [9]. One remarkable improvement
in the medical outcome in these modern wars that may impact the preva-
lence of TBI is the very high survival rate among combat-injured United
States soldiers. At present, the killed/wounded ratio is less than 1 in 10,
which is a dramatic improvement over the 1 in 4 ratio of World War II.
The reason for this is the introduction of modern body armor coupled
with improved battlefield medical care. Modern military body armor is a sci-
entific and engineering achievement [10]. When fitted with ballistic plates, it
can protect the wearer from most shrapnel and small arms bullets. Combat
helmets have also evolved and are similarly effective in mitigating injury
from common battle-related threats. Body armor and combat helmets
have undoubtedly reduced the incidence of injuries to the head, chest, and
abdomen, and injury severity [11]. These devices, however, are not perfect.
An unanticipated consequence is that more war fighters are surviving
what previously would have been fatal injuries, and other injury conditions
like TBI from explosive blast are now becoming relatively more prevalent
[12]. Future efforts need to center on treatment methods that lead to im-
proved neurologic and functional recovery of survivors of TBI [13,14]. Bat-
tlefield medicine has also evolved. It is reported that most fatal injuries on
the battlefield result from injuries that are nonsurvivable in any setting
[15]. The modern triage and evacuation system is highly effective and far for-
ward medical providers are able to respond within seconds of an injury.
 MANAGEMENT OF TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY IN THE ICU 411

They provide early effective care using tourniquets; hemostatic agents (eg,
HemCon bandages); and, importantly, arrange fast evacuation [16]. Modern
combat evacuation procedures used during OIF and OEF provide a model
for delivery of forward critical care [17]. At the combat support hospital,
modern trauma care provided by appropriate specialty physicians and
nurses is available and includes CT scan, advanced emergency medical ser-
vices, early surgical intervention, and intensive care. Once stabilized, pa-
tients are evacuated out of the war zone to Europe or the United States.
This too has likely contributed to the remarkable survival rate of modern
war casualties.
The goal of the chain of medical providers is to provide early clinical sta-
bilization of the brain-injured patient, to arrest ongoing injury, to preserve
and restore neurologic function, and to avoid secondary medical complica-
tions. In the field this first requires recognition that the brain is injured. Ap-
propriate management can be instituted and rapid evacuation initiated to
centers where neurointensivists, neurosurgeons, and other providers deliver
more advanced care.

Pathogenesis of traumatic brain injury

Classically, TBI is thought to have at least two phases. The first or initial
injury occurs as a direct result of the primary traumatic event. A second in-
jury phase occurs from multiple neuropathologic processes that can con-
tinue for days to weeks after the initial insult [18]. One of the principal
goals of neurocritical care is to intervene in a timely fashion to prevent
and disrupt secondary injury mechanisms.

Primary injury
Primary injury is immediate and not amenable to treatment. If severe,
death can occur almost instantaneously. Typically, the damage that occurs
from this primary phase is often complete by the time medical care can be
instituted. The best way to mitigate primary injury is prevention. Education
and devices, such as motorcycle helmets, can contribute to reducing TBI
[19].
There are two classical types of head injury: closed head injury (CHI)
and penetrating TBI. In CHI, direct impact of neuronal tissue against the
bony vault, and shearing of neurovascular structures from rotational or re-
bounding forces, results in cell damage at the cell body and axon level. In
the United States, most CHI is caused by motor vehicle accidents [20].
Other causes are falls, sporting event injuries, and assault. Motor vehicle ac-
cidents, which are high-speed collisions with very rapid deceleration, are
particularly injurious. Because the neuronal structures reside in a fluid-filled
compartment, they often lag behind the bony structure as it moves during
the sudden stopping of the body in motion. The structures strike both in the
412 LING & MARSHALL

direct and opposite plane of motion against the inner bony table. This is the
basis of the coup–contre-coup lesion pattern, where contusional or other in-
jury to the brain is seen deep to the site of skull impact, and 180 degrees
opposite the site of impact. If there is a rotational component, structures
torque and twist and shearing can occur. This is the cause of diffuse axonal
injury, commonly seen radiographically as punctuate hemorrhages on CT
or MRI after TBI.
In penetrating TBI, the calvarial vault is violated by a foreign body. That
body may be large and moving slowly as with a knife, or small and moving
rapidly as with a bullet. In both circumstances, the intruding body tears neu-
ral, vascular, and support structures as it traverses through the brain. If
moving at very high velocity (eg, supersonic), the vacuum created by the
projectile’s wake gives rise to tissue cavitation. Fired projectiles, based on
shape and entry velocity, may cause more or less of this type of injury. Of
note, the temporary cavity may be several times larger that the projectile it-
self, and although transient, the expansion of tissue is sufficient to cause sig-
nificant irreversible damage.
Based on experience gathered during OIF and OEF, there is increasing
awareness of another class of head injury, referred to as ‘‘blast TBI’’
(bTBI). The most common agent associated with modern bTBI is explosive
ordinance in the form of an improvised explosive device. bTBI may be con-
sidered a subtype of CHI. Many warfighters, who are exposed to explosions,
suffer isolated bTBI and do not typically have penetrating injury to the
brain. Their injuries result from explosive forces transmitted into brain pa-
renchyma without breach of the calvarium. The mechanism of injury seems
to be different from other forms of CHI as described previously. The most
widely accepted opinion, although speculative, is that disruption of brain
function following exposure to an explosion is caused by a concussive pres-
sure wave. This concept may be an incomplete explanation for this mecha-
nism of injury, because an explosion is composed of more than pressure
phenomenon and there are many other physical forces emanating from an
explosion, such as electromagnetic energy, acoustics, toxic fumes, and
others, that may be injurious to brain.
TBI may be further classified as focal or diffuse. Focal injuries occur at
the site of impact. Neurologic deficits are referable to those areas. The orbi-
tofrontal and anterior temporal lobes are most commonly affected because
of the location of the brain over the rough surface of the skull base. Because
of the tendency for head trauma to occur in an anteroposterior direction, the
brain moves similarly and is injured as it traverses over the skull base. Par-
ticular vigilance must be made to identify the occurrence of delayed hema-
tomas, which can develop up to several days after the inciting trauma [21].
Diffuse axonal injury is shearing of axons in cerebral white matter, which
causes nonlateralizing neurologic deficits, such as encephalopathy. The con-
sequences of this type of injury can be delayed by up to 12 hours following
initial trauma [22]. Diffuse axonal injury can be identified as petechial white
 MANAGEMENT OF TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY IN THE ICU 413

matter hemorrhages on CT and MRI studies after TBI; however, findings

may be subtle or absent on imaging. Recent evidence also suggests that
the incidence of diffuse axonal injury may be higher with forces occurring
in a lateral orientation, as opposed to a frontal or oblique impact in CHI
[23].

Secondary injury
Therapeutic interventions are based on attenuating the secondary injury
phase of TBI. This phase of injury begins quickly after the primary phase
and can continue for a prolonged period involving dysfunction and death
of neurons and glial supporting structures. It is thought that the most signif-
icant burden of neurologic injury following TBI is related to this secondary
injury. A broad range of mechanisms are involved in secondary injury and
include hypoxia; ischemia; free radicals; excitatory amino acids; ion imbal-
ance (eg, calcium); temperature dysregulation; and inflammation [21]. Many
attempts at developing therapeutic strategies have focused on secondary in-
jury processes. Despite considerable research efforts, current clinical treat-
ment is largely confined to supportive measures with particular emphasis
on maintaining perfusion pressure and tissue oxygenation; minimizing intra-
compartment hypertension (eg, increased intracranial pressure [ICP]); and
treatment of cerebral edema. Scientific efforts to develop effective treatment
strategies aimed at improving meaningful clinical outcomes are ongoing.
Hypoxia and hypoperfusion are recognized as leading contributing fac-
tors to secondary brain injury. The injured brain is more susceptible to hyp-
oxic-ischemic states because of impaired cerebral vascular autoregulation.
The most susceptible areas are the hippocampus and border zone or water-
shed regions. It has been hypothesized that delayed neurologic compromise
can be attributed to the effects of ischemia [21]. Previous work has shown
that a single episode of hypotension where systolic blood pressures falls be-
low 90 mm Hg is associated with worse outcomes in severe TBI [24]. Diffuse
microvascular damage is associated with loss of cerebral vascular autoregu-
lation and loss of blood-brain barrier integrity. Laceration of microvascula-
ture exacerbates this injury. Microvascular damage contributes to the
prominent pattern of vasogenic edema observed after TBI [25].

Traumatic brain injury taxonomy

Classification and initial evaluation
TBI severity is classified as mild, moderate, or severe depending on the
level of consciousness on admission. Patients with mild TBI have an admis-
sion Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) of greater than 13. Mild TBI is frequently
referred to as ‘‘concussion.’’ These patients have experienced a brief (!30
minute) loss of consciousness, and presenting complaints include headache,
414 LING & MARSHALL

confusion, and amnesia [26]. Following the acute period, a postconcussive

syndrome may develop, which usually lasts a few weeks but can persist up
to a year or more [5]. Postconcussive syndrome is a constellation of symp-
toms that include headache, dizziness, difficulty concentrating, anxiety,
depression, and insomnia. The American Academy of Neurology has pub-
lished guidelines for concussion management that includes recommended
periods of recovery (Table 1). Other guidelines can also be used, such as
the Cantu Grading system and the Colorado Medical Society Guidelines,
which have been developed for sports-related TBI, but are widely applied
and meaningful for the management of both civilian and military patients
with head injury [27–30].
Moderate TBI is defined as an admission GCS of 9 to 13, and is often
associated with prolonged loss of consciousness or neurologic deficit [31].
Clinically, patients with moderate TBI require hospitalization and may
need neurosurgical intervention. Moderate TBI is associated with a greater
likelihood of abnormal findings on craniocerebral imaging. These patients
may also develop a postconcussive syndrome.
Patients with GCS scores of 8 or less have severe TBI. They suffer from
significant neurologic injury. Typically, they have abnormal neuroimaging
(eg, CT scan revealing skull fracture or intracranial hemorrhage) [31]. These
patients require admission to the ICU, and institution of rapid measures for
control of the airway, mechanical ventilation, neurosurgical evaluation or
intervention, and ICP monitoring. Recovery is prolonged and usually in-
complete. A significant percentage of severe TBI patients do not survive
to 1 year [32].
A new classification for bTBI is being proposed by the Defense and Vet-
erans Brain Injury Center (DVBIC). The DVBIC conducts clinical research
on military-relevant TBI, such as bTBI. The increasing clinical experience
with this disease suggests that the existing severity definitions for classical
TBI may not be appropriate for bTBI. Mild bTBI is defined as loss of con-
sciousness less than 1 hour and posttraumatic amnesia less than 24 hours.
Moderate bTBI is loss of consciousness for more than 1 but less than 24
hours and amnesia lasting more than 1 but less than 7 days. Severe bTBI
is loss of consciousness for more than 24 hours and amnesia for more
than 7 days. It should be understood that this new bTBI classification

Table 1
Glasgow coma score
Best motor response (M) Best verbal response (V) Best eye opening (E)
Follows commands 6
Localizes to pain 5 Oriented, alert 5
Withdrawal to pain 4 Confused, appropriate 4 Opens eyes spontaneously 4
Flexor posturing 3 Disoriented, inappropriate 3 Opens eyes to voice 3
Extensor posturing 2 Incomprehensible speech 2 Opens eyes to pain 2
No response 1 No response 1 No response 1
 MANAGEMENT OF TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY IN THE ICU 415

was only recently proposed and has not yet gained wide acceptance in the
medical community [33,34].
Patients with mild or moderate TBI often have recovered or are rapidly
recovering by the time they reach the emergency department. The critical el-
ement in their subsequent management is the duration of amnesia or any
history of a loss of consciousness. The American Academy of Neurology
grading scale for concussion is based primarily on these two aspects of
the neurologic history (Table 2). Longer periods of abnormal sensorium
are associated with higher grades of concussion. The higher grades necessi-
tate longer periods of convalescence and removal of the patient from an en-
vironment in which any further trauma is likely to occur. The DVBIC uses
this grading scale based on loss of consciousness and the presence of post-
traumatic amnesia, but other factors including GCS and alteration of con-
sciousness are taken into account. Essentially, a patient with any degree of
alteration of consciousness or feeling ‘‘dazed’’ after exposure to head
trauma or concussive blast is classified and treated as having sustained at
least a mild TBI [35].

Second impact syndrome

A subsequent head injury during the vulnerable recovery period may re-
sult in ‘‘second impact syndrome.’’ Second impact syndrome is seen mostly
in children and adolescents and has been associated with significantly worse
clinical outcomes. In severe instances, coma can rapidly develop following
Table 2
American Academy of Neurology concussion management
Grade 1 (mild)
Remove from duty/work/play
Examine immediately and at 5-min intervals
May return to duty/work if clear within 15 min
Grade 2 (moderate)
Remove from duty for the rest of the day
Examine frequently for signs of central nervous system deterioration
Physician’s neuroexamination as soon as possible (within 24 h)
Return to duty after 1 full asymptomatic week (after being cleared by physician)
Grade 3 (severe)
Take to emergency department
Neurologic evaluation, including appropriate neuroimaging
Consider hospital admission
Grade of concussion Return to play/work
Grade 1 (first) 15 min
Grade 1 (second) 1 wk
Grade 2 (first) 1 wk
Grade 2 (second) 2 wk
Grade 3 (first) (brief LOC) 1 wk
Grade 3 (first) (long LOC) 2 wk
Grade 3 (second) 1 mo
Grade 3 (third) Consult a neurologist
416 LING & MARSHALL

a second injury, often within minutes. The exact mechanisms by which sec-
ond impact syndrome occurs is not fully understood but it is postulated that
the additional injury leads to an exacerbation in already impaired cerebral
autoregulation, diffuse cerebral edema, and intracranial hypertension. For-
tunately, second impact syndrome is uncommon in its most severe form.
When it occurs, however, there is up to 50% mortality.

Clinical management
Early intervention
An organized team approach is essential to proper management of TBI.
The initial goals of care should be immediate attention to airway and cardio-
pulmonary function (ABCs); early identification of the potential for TBI in
any trauma victim; and minimization of secondary insults, such as hypoxic-
ischemic injury. In the first few minutes, nonphysician health care providers,
such as emergency medical technicians, can make rapid initial neurologic
evaluations using a standardized grading scheme, such as the GCS. In the
absence of a formal GCS, this information can often be elicited from first
responder data or interviews. The GCS is important in categorizing and tri-
age of TBI patients, and providing a quantifiable measure of impairment,
which can help decide early management sequences in an organized algo-
rithm. This initial examination also helps guide prognosis for the outcome
of severe TBI.
It is crucial that prehospital providers optimize perfusion and oxygena-
tion, because it is well recognized that the duration and severity of hypoxia
and hypotension in this critical early period has dramatic consequences on
clinical outcome [14,36]. Avoidance of hypotension (systolic blood pressure
!90 mm Hg) and maintenance of adequate oxygen saturation (O90%) are
level II and level III recommendations from the Brain Trauma Foundation,
respectively [37].
In many patients with moderate and all patients with severe TBI, airway
protective mechanisms are impaired and tracheal intubation should be per-
formed. The cervical spine should be immobilized with a rigid neck collar
and the head placed in midline position and elevated to 30 degrees. The
neck collar serves not only to protect the cervical spine until appropriate im-
aging can be performed to rule out instability, but it also keeps the head
midline to avoid compromising venous drainage, which can increase ICP.
Surgical management may be beneficial in selected patients with traumatic
lesions. There are many injuries that do not warrant surgical intervention and
management is primarily medical. Diffuse or disseminated injuries, such as
diffuse axonal injury and contusional injury, typically are not managed sur-
gically. Conditions in which neurosurgery is warranted are those related to
breach of the calvarium, presence of expanding intracranial hematoma, or
malignant cerebral edema. Depressed skull fractures often requires elevation.
 MANAGEMENT OF TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY IN THE ICU 417

Hematomas, in particular symptomatic subdural and epidural hematomas,

may need evacuation. Subdural hematoma is the basis of approximately
50% of hospital admissions for head injury; epidural hematoma accounts
for only 3% [34,38]. When there is a skull fracture, especially at the tempor-
oparietal junction, the incidence of epidural hematoma tends to increase,
most commonly because of disruption of the middle meningeal artery.
Decompressive craniectomy is an emerging clinical management ap-
proach in the early intervention and management of TBI. The reported expe-
rience to date is conflicting. In a study of 57 young patients with severe TBI
(age !50), early decompressive craniectomy was associated with a good out-
come, defined as social rehabilitation, in 58% of patients. The authors re-
ported a relatively low mortality of less than 20% [39]. A retrospective
French study was able to show a similar outcome in only 25% of severe
TBI patients [40]. The more recent Early Decompressive Craniectomy for Se-
vere TBI study reported that patients who underwent decompressive craniec-
tomy for uncontrolled ICP had significant improvement in ICP control and
better clinical outcomes compared with historical controls [41]. This is coun-
tered, however, by a retrospective study of the Trauma Coma Data Bank
that suggested there was no significant improvement with craniectomy [42].
One of the difficulties in interpreting the available data is the lack of agree-
ment regarding surgical technique (release the dura or not, timing of surgery,
cut-off age, and TBI severity on presentation) [43]. At present, the Random-
ized Evaluation of Surgery with Craniectomy for Uncontrollable Elevation
of Intra-Cranial Pressure trial is under way. This is a large multicenter trial
in Europe comparing decompressive craniectomy with medical management
in TBI. One application of decompressive craniectomy is treatment of severe
bTBI. United States military neurosurgeons report favorable outcomes in
bTBI patients who undergo early decompressive craniectomy [33,44].

Neurologic intensive care unit management of severe traumatic

brain injury
After initial emergency care, patients with severe TBI require admission
to the ICU. Limited available data suggest that outcomes may be improved
when specialized neurologic intensive care teams or algorithms are present
to guide management [45]. The presence of other traumatic injuries may re-
quire a broad multidisciplinary approach for these patients, including input
from trauma, orthopedic, craniofacial, ophthalmologic, and other specialty
physicians.

Continuous neurologic evaluations

There is no better diagnostic approach than clinically to examine the pa-
tient, and track changes over time with serial evaluations. In the acute pe-
riod, these evaluations may be as often as every hour with increasing
418 LING & MARSHALL

intervals as the patient’s condition stabilizes. If needed, ICP and cerebral

perfusion pressure (CPP) measurements should be made continuously.
Even in the presence of ICP monitoring, the importance of the clinical ex-
amination and neurologic assessment cannot be overstated. Generally, the
peak period of cerebral edema is from 48 to 96 hours after TBI. Thereafter,
this resolves and clinical improvement should follow with improved ICP
control.

Imaging and intracranial pressure monitoring

Neuroimaging with a non–contrast enhanced CT scan should be done as
soon as possible in the emergency department. The goal is to identify as
early as possible any lesions amenable to neurosurgical intervention. If
such a lesion is not identified, the patient should be admitted to the ICU
for further treatment. If the patient has a GCS of 8 or less, any acute abnor-
mality on CT, a systolic pressure of less than 90 mm Hg, or age greater than
40 years, an ICP monitoring device should be placed. The external ventric-
ular drain provides the most accurate and reliable data and also provides
a means to control ICP by cerebrospinal fluid removal. Other monitoring
options, which do not have this treatment advantage but are less invasive,
include the subdural bolt and fiberoptic catheter. If there is any degree of
hydrocephalus on imaging studies, an external ventricular drain is the best
choice for monitoring and treating ICP.

Increased intracranial pressure

Increasing volume within a closed rigid container, such as the skull, inev-
itability leads to increasing pressure within that confined space. The in-
creased pressure, particularly if it is compartmentalized, compresses vital
structures, such as brain and blood vessels. If blood vessels are compressed,
then ischemia ensues. If brain is compressed, ICP can rise significantly and if
allowed to progress can lead to herniation. General management of in-
creased ICP and herniation includes control of the airway; elevation of
the patient’s head to 30 degrees; and administration of mannitol, 0.5 to
1 g/kg over 10 minutes. Another option, particularly for patients with com-
promised intravascular volume, is to administer hypertonic saline. Recent
data suggest that an intravenous bolus of 23.4% saline, 30 mL, given over
10 to 15 minutes, may effectively reverse herniation and decrease ICP,
with only transient hemodynamic repercussions [46]. Hyperventilation
may also be considered, but only as an emergent, temporary intervention,
because prolonged hyperventilation has been associated with exacerbation
of cerebral ischemia [47]. Short durations of hyperventilation are acceptable
as a temporizing measure until other (surgical, hyperosmolar) means of
managing increased ICP are available. If hyperventilation is continued for
longer than 12 hours, metabolic compensation negates the ameliorative
 MANAGEMENT OF TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY IN THE ICU 419

effects of respiratory alkalosis caused by a hypocapnic state and continued

hyperventilation may be harmful. Induced hypothermia for TBI remains
controversial because of the lack of compelling outcome-modifying results
from clinical trials. Eventually, it may prove to be beneficial in subsets of
patients [14,48,49]. Recent animal data show promise for induced hypother-
mia with improved neurophysiologic metrics in asphyxial (nontraumatic)
brain injury [50]. Current use of prophylactic hypothermia for severe TBI
is not substantiated, however, based on a level III recommendation from
the Brain Trauma Foundation [37].
The use of hypertonic saline for cerebral edema merits further discussion.
A single dose of 23.4% hypertonic saline can reduce ICP. There is some ev-
idence to suggest that this is as effective in lowering ICP and may possibly
have a longer duration of effect compared with mannitol [51]. This concen-
tration is a low-volume infusion, and may be beneficial in cases where the
volume status of the patient dictates caution with large infusions. The ben-
efit of hypertonic saline is that it helps maintain a high serum sodium con-
centration and thereby promotes water movement from the intracranial
compartment into the vasculature. When used clinically, 2% saline solutions
can be given by a peripheral line, but 3% and higher concentrations of saline
should be administered through a central venous catheter to minimize ve-
nous phlebitis. When used as a continuous infusion, hypertonic saline solu-
tions are commonly prepared as a 1:1 ratio of sodium acetate to sodium
chloride so as to minimize the development of hyperchloremic metabolic ac-
idosis. The use of hypertonics has not received a level III or better recom-
mendation for use in trauma-induced increased ICP [35,52–54].

Sustained treatment of increased intracranial pressure

Current guidelines recommend maintaining the ICP less than 20 mm Hg
and the CPP greater than 60 mm Hg. If ICP remains poorly controlled after
efforts described previously, 23.4% saline may be administered through
a central venous catheter. If this should also be unsuccessful in reduction
of ICP, consideration should be made toward pharmacologic coma or sur-
gical decompression. The postulated effect of pharmacologic coma on ICP is
through reduction of cerebral metabolism (CMRO2) with concomitant re-
ductions in cerebral blood flow and reduced tissue oxygen demand. The
most commonly used agent for pharmacologic coma, pentobarbital, can
be administered intravenously at a loading dose of 5 mg/kg, followed by
an infusion of 1 to 3 mg/kg/h; a high-dose regimen may also be used with
an intravenous bolus dose of 10 mg/kg over 30 minutes followed by 5
mg/kg/h infusion for 3 hours, followed by 1 mg/kg/h titrated to either burst
suppression on continuous electroencephalogram monitoring or a reduction
in ICP. Another option for pharmacologic coma is propofol, which is given
in an intravenous loading dose of 2 mg/kg, followed by a titrated infusion of
up to 200 mg/kg/min. The use of propofol for this clinical indication is
420 LING & MARSHALL

controversial. Propofol has been associated with the development of a ‘‘pro-

pofol infusion syndrome’’ of renal failure, hyperkalemia, myocardial failure,
and metabolic acidosis, often resulting in death. The mechanism for this is
not fully understood. If these efforts fail to control ICP, or as an alternative
to pharmacologic coma, decompressive craniectomy or lobectomy may be
considered. Should the patient be unsuitable for surgery and if the ICP ele-
vation remains recalcitrant, then the patient’s condition is likely terminal
[37,55–57].
Recent experience with head injuries sustained in combat has suggested
a new paradigm for the early surgical management for bTBI and TBI. Ex-
perience has shown that early hyperemia and severe cerebral edema occurs
frequently in the setting of a significant blast injury; a decompressive cra-
niectomy permits the swelling brain to avoid compression by the bony skull.
From a practical military standpoint, craniectomy provides an additional
measure of safety for ICP control through the air-evacuation process where,
at times, ICP management can be challenging. Another benefit of early de-
compressive craniectomy is that it may obviate the need to use more conven-
tional methods to control ICP, such as pharmacologic coma, which is
difficult to execute in a deployed and hostile setting because of the limited
number of neurologic critical care specialists and lack of electroencephalo-
gram support in a war zone. In this setting, decompressive craniectomy
may be the most practical, if seemingly aggressive, approach [33,38,44].

Hemodynamic management
The recommended CPP goal is greater than 60 mm Hg. To achieve this,
fluid resuscitation to euvolemia is the first step. Hypo-osomolar solutions,
such as 0.50 normal saline or 5% dextrose in water, are to be avoided. A
commonly used hyperosmolar fluid is normal saline. Other options as clin-
ically warranted are hypertonic saline (eg, 2% or 3% sodium solutions); col-
loids; and blood products. If CPP cannot be maintained with intravenous
fluids alone, vasoactive pharmacologic agents, such as norepinephrine or
phenylephrine, may be required. These two agents are preferred because
they have minimal effects on cerebral vasomotor tone. Invasive hemody-
namic monitoring with a central venous pressure catheter and an arterial
catheter may be needed. It should be remembered that barbiturates and pro-
pofol are myocardial depressants and peripheral vasodilators, and invasive
hemodynamic monitoring and support are often necessary when pharmaco-
logic coma is induced.

Vasospasm and pseudoaneurysms after traumatic brain injury

Vasospasm is a common finding after bTBI. Recent data by Armonda
and colleagues [58] reveal that up to 50% of patients suffering moderate
to severe bTBI developed cerebral vasospasm. Transcranial Doppler studies
in theater reveal that vasospasm can develop early, often within 48 hours of
 MANAGEMENT OF TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY IN THE ICU 421

injury [59]. Vasospasm can also present later in postinjury phase, typically
10 or more days after initial insult.
Penetrating head injury and bTBI may be associated with pseudoaneur-
ysm formation. Such blast-related pseudoaneurysms have been found to ex-
pand despite endovascular ablation attempts. Patients with such lesions
often require craniotomy and aneurysm clipping [58]. The accuracy of non-
invasive forms of vascular imaging, such as MR angiogram and CT angio-
gram, in diagnosing pseudoaneurysms may be limited. Furthermore, many
military patients have retained fragments that obviate the use of MRI. The
military causalities in OIF and OEF evaluated at Walter Reed Army Med-
ical Center and the National Naval Medical Center undergo four-vessel ce-
rebral angiography as the favored diagnostic approach.

Sedation
If the TBI patient is agitated, evaluation must be made to determine
whether the patient is in pain, hypoxic, delirious, or poorly tolerating me-
chanical ventilation. If pain is a concern, then a narcotic analgesic, such
as fentanyl or other short-acting medication, should be administered. Lon-
ger-acting narcotics, such as morphine or hydromorphone, are discouraged
even though they can be easily reversed by naloxone. Administration of nal-
oxone should not be done routinely to facilitate a neurologic examination
because of the likely discomfort that this may cause a victim of recent
trauma. Preferably, a short-acting narcotic infusion is held for a brief
time, which allows reassessment of neurologic status. If delirium or agitation
alone is the issue, then haloperidol or an atypical antipsychotic can be used.
In the acute period after TBI, haloperidol is nonsedating, which preserves
the neurologic examination. In the more subacute period, when observation
of subtle examination changes is not as crucial, atypical antipsychotics, most
of which do not have haloperidol’s nonsedating property but are better tol-
erated, may be a better choice for controlling agitation. Recent work in an-
imals has suggested that, in addition to typical and atypical neuroleptic’s
dissimilar side effect profiles, there may be differences in their use and effect
on long-term neurologic outcomes, although this area needs further research
[60].

Avoidance of other exacerbating complications

Hypoxic states, seizures, and fevers are to be avoided. Maintaining PaO2
at approximately 80 to 100 mm Hg is sufficient; there is no documented ben-
efit to higher levels of oxygen but there is potential for toxicity.
Studies have demonstrated that phenytoin is beneficial in reducing the
risk of seizures during the first week after TBI [61]. It has not been shown
to prevent late seizures (ie, those developing after 7 days). Because fewer
than 50% of TBI patients develop late seizures, the recommended approach
is to stop seizure prophylaxis after the first 7 days and only reinstitute
422 LING & MARSHALL

treatment should late seizures manifest. The potential for cognitive side ef-
fects of phenytoin make prolonged prophylactic use of this medication less
attractive. Alternatives abound, including carbamazepine and valproate,
and levetiracetam, which is available in an intravenous or enteric form
[62]. This medication is commonly used in the authors’ institution for this
indication.
Hypertension, tachycardia, and fever and dystonia may be a sign of au-
tonomic dysregulation syndrome, frequently seen in TBI, although alterna-
tive explanations must be ruled out before accepting this diagnosis of
exclusion. Bromocriptine, propanolol, and opioids can be used to treat
this condition.
Temperature dysregulation is common in TBI, and fever from any cause
greatly increases cerebral metabolism and should be treated with the use of
antipyretic interventions, such as acetaminophen and cooling blankets.
Other modalities of induction of normothermia include skin-applied gel
cooling systems and intravenous methods. The use of prophylactic hypo-
thermia in brain trauma has to date failed to show a benefit in terms of post-
injury outcome measurements, and is currently not recommended [63].
Other important management considerations include prevention of gas-
tric stress ulcer, venous thromboembolism, and decubitus ulcers. Gastric
stress ulcers may be prevented using such agents as H2 antagonists or proton
pump inhibitors. These medications should be routinely used in all severe
head injury patients. TBI patients are at high risk for developing deep ve-
nous thrombosis with subsequent thromboembolism. The optimal approach
in severe TBI with intracranial hemorrhage is uncertain. Sequential com-
pression devices on the lower extremities are minimally invasive and are
not associated with any notable adverse effects. The optimal timing of intro-
duction of unfractionated or low-molecular-weight prophylactic heparin is
less clear. If there are no contraindications to heparin use, however, then
treatment should be started as soon as possible, ideally within the first 36
hours of injury [64]. The routine placement of inferior vena cava filters is
controversial, and placement is currently supported only by a level III rec-
ommendation with a GCS score of greater than 8 and contraindications to
any anticoagulants [64].

Prognosis of traumatic brain injury

Clinically, the most useful prognostic indicator following TBI is the neu-
rologic examination at presentation. Classically, it has been taught that the
better the initial neurologic examination, the less likelihood of severe neuro-
logic damage [65]. For patients with severe TBI, the initial GCS is the most
commonly used prognostic indicator (see Table 1). The lower the initial
GCS score, the less likely a patient has meaningful neurologic or functional
outcome. Comparisons have been made based on historical data obtained
 MANAGEMENT OF TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY IN THE ICU 423

for anoxic or non-TBI from cardiac arrest, but this mechanism of injury and
patient population (ie, age) is quite different [66]. A prospective study with
long-term outcomes measurements for severe TBI and bTBI has been
needed for some time. Recent publication of the CRASH trial has associ-
ated long-term (6 month) outcomes in TBI with age, GCS score, pupil reac-
tivity, and the presence of extracranial injury, in addition to radiographic
and other data collected for more than 8000 TBI patients in multiple coun-
tries. Interestingly, advancing age was most associated with poor outcome in
high-income countries, and low GCS was most associated with poor out-
come in low-middle income countries. The absence of pupil reactivity was
the third strongest predictor of poor outcome in high- and low-income
countries. Radiographically, obliteration of the third ventricle and midline
shift was most likely to be associated with early mortality (14 days), and
nonevacuated hematoma was most likely to be associated with poor out-
come at 6 months [67]. Recent work using diffusion-weighted MRI corre-
lated with 6 to 12 months Glasgow Outcomes Scale shows MRI as
a helpful addition to prognostication in TBI [68]. Other modalities including
MRI diffusion tensor imaging have been helpful in prognostication in TBI
[69].

Summary
TBI is a common and complex clinical entity and deserves better and con-
tinued research on interventions and initial treatment postinjury. Blast-
related TBI is increasingly recognized and characterized in part because of
the military’s current demographics of casualties sustained in OIF and
OEF. Treatment of moderate to severe TBI and bTBI is optimally delivered
in the ICU, where the first few hours and days after injury are likely to have
a significant impact on patient outcome. Mortality following TBI has been
greatly reduced, although morbidity from TBI and bTBI remains a signifi-
cant problem. With respect to bTBI, a comprehensive epidemiologic study
is desperately needed to determine the prevalence, risk factors, natural his-
tory, and outcomes of this condition. Additionally, a better comprehensive
clinical description of bTBI with strict diagnostic criteria could greatly facil-
itate study of this illness.
Current medical management of TBI is articulated on minimizing sec-
ondary injury by optimizing cerebral perfusion and oxygenation and pre-
venting or treating nonneurologic morbidity. There are major medical
research efforts examining the underlying mechanisms of secondary brain
injury, which provides hope for effective therapies in the future. Presently,
a number of promising therapeutic modalities are undergoing clinical trials,
and as new pharmacologic and medical approaches are introduced, there
will be increasing opportunity to treat these patients and improve their neu-
rologic outcomes.
424 LING & MARSHALL

References
[1] Morgan AS. The trauma centers as a continuum of care for persons with severe brain injury.
J Head Trauma Rehabil 1994;9:1–10.
[2] Sosin DM, Sniezek JE, Waxweiler RJ. Trends in death associated with traumatic brain in-
jury, 1979 through 1992: success and failure. JAMA 1995;273:1778–80.
[3] Giacino J, Zasler N. Outcome after severe traumatic brain injury: coma, the vegetative state
and the minimally responsive state. J Head Trauma Rehabil 1994;273:1778–80.
[4] Rimel RW, Giordani B, Barth JT, et al. Disability caused by minor head injury. Neurosur-
gery 1981;9:221–8.
[5] Alexander MP. Mild traumatic brain injury: pathophysiology, natural history, and clinical
management. Neurology 1995;45:1253–60 [see comment].
[6] Lu J, Marmarou A, Choi S, et al. Mortality from traumatic brain injury. Acta Neurochir
Suppl 2005;95:281–5.
[7] Bellamy RF. The medical effects of conventional weapons. World J Surg 1992;16:888–92.
[8] Carey ME. Analysis of wounds incurred by U.S. army seventh corps personnel treated in
corps hospitals during Operation Desert Storm, February 20 to March 10, 1991. J Trauma
1996;40:S165–9.
[9] Rustemeyer J, Kranz V, Bremerick A. Injuries in combat from 1982–2005 with particular ref-
erence to those to the head and neck: a review. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007;45:556–60.
[10] U.S. Department of Defense. Manufacturing technology program. Available at: https://
www.dodmantech.com/award/CY01/index.asp?main¼award. Accessed February 14, 2007.
[11] Patel TH, Wenner KA, Price SA, et al. A U.S. army forward surgical team’s experience in
Operation Iraqi Freedom. J Trauma 2004;57:201–7.
[12] Zoroya G. Key Iraq wound: brain trauma. Available at: usatoday.com. Accessed October
15, 2007.
[13] Palter M, Dobkin E, Morgan A, et al. Intensive care management of severe head injury.
J Head Trauma Rehabil 1994;9:20–31.
[14] Marion DW, Penrod LE, Kelsey SF, et al. Treatment of traumatic brain injury with moder-
ate hypothermia. N Engl J Med 1997;336:540–6.
[15] Holcomb JB, McMullin NR, Pearse L, et al. Causes of death in U.S. special operations forces
in the global war on terrorism: 2001–2004. Ann Surg 2007;245:986–91.
[16] Wedmore I, McManus JG, Pusateri AE, et al. A special report on the chitosan-based hemo-
static dressing: experience in current combat operations. J Trauma 2006;60:655–8.
[17] Sariego J. CCATT: a military model for civilian disaster management. Disaster Manag
Response 2006;4:114–7.
[18] Casey K, McIntosh T. The role of novel pharmacotherapy in brain injury. J Head Trauma
Rehabil 1994;9:82–90.
[19] Bledsoe GH, Li G. Trends in Arkansas motorcycle trauma after helmet law repeal. South
Med J 2005;98:436–40.
[20] Jagger J. Prevention of brain trauma by legislation, regulation, and improved technology:
a focus on motor vehicles. J Neurotrauma 1992;9:S313–6.
[21] Chesnut RM, Marshall LF. Management of severe head injury. In: Ropper A, editor. Neu-
rological and neurosurgical intensive care. 3rd edition. New York: Raven Press; 1993.
p. 203–46.
[22] Salazar AM, Johnson RT, editors. Current therapies in neurologic disease. 3rd edition. Phil-
adelphia: B.C: Decker, Inc.; 1990. p. 202–8.
[23] Zwahlen RA, Labler L, Trentz O, et al. Lateral impact in closed head injury: a substantially
increased risk for diffuse axonal injury: a preliminary study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2007;
35:142–6.
[24] Chesnut RM, Gautille T, Blunt BA, et al. The localizing value of asymmetry in pupillary size
in severe head injury: relation to lesion type and location. Neurosurgery 1994;34:840–5.
[25] Salazar AM. Challenges in neurology. Philadelphia: F.A. Davis, Co; 1990.
 MANAGEMENT OF TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY IN THE ICU 425

[26] Practice parameter: the management of concussion in sports (summary statement). Report
of the quality standards subcommittee. Neurology 1997;48:581–5.
[27] Ling G. Traumatic brain and spinal cord injuries. In: Goldman L, Ausiello D, editors. Text-
book of medicine. 23rd edition. Philadelphia: Saunders; 2007. p. 2646–51.
[28] Ropper AH, Gorson KC. Clinical practice: concussion. N Engl J Med 2007;356:166–72.
[29] Bailes JE, Cantu RC. Head injury in athletes. Neurosurgery 2001;48:26–45.
[30] Bleiberg J, Cernich AN, Cameron K, et al. Duration of cognitive impairment after sports
concussion. Neurosurgery 2004;54:1073–8.
[31] Geocadin R, Bhardwaj A, Mirski M, et al, editors. Traumatic brain injury. Totowa (NJ):
Humana Press; 2004. p. 73–89.
[32] Medical aspects of the persistent vegetative state (1). The multi-society task force on PVS.
N Engl J Med 1994;330:1499–508 [see comment].
[33] Okie S. Traumatic brain injury in the war zone. N Engl J Med 2005;352:2043–7.
[34] Warden DL, French L. Traumatic brain injury in the war zone. N Engl J Med 2005;353:
633–4.
[35] DVBIC. Available at: dvbic.org. Accessed October 15, 2007.
[36] Teasdale G, Jennett B. Assessment of coma and impaired consciousness: a practical scale.
Lancet 1974;2:81–4.
[37] Povlishock JT, Bullock MR. Guidelines for the management of severe traumatic brain
injury. J Neurotrauma 2007;24:7–94.
[38] Part 1: guidelines for the management of penetrating brain injury. Introduction and meth-
odology. J Trauma 2001;51:S3–6.
[39] Guerra WK, Gaab MR, Dietz H, et al. Surgical decompression for traumatic brain swelling:
indications and results. J Neurosurg 1999;90:187–96.
[40] Albanese J, Leone M, Alliez JR, et al. Decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain
injury: evaluation of the effects at one year. Crit Care Med 2003;31:2535–8.
[41] Rosenfeld JV, Cooper DJ, Kossmann T, et al. Decompressive craniectomy. J Neurosurg
2007;106:195–6.
[42] Munch E, Horn P, Schurer L, et al. Management of severe traumatic brain injury by decom-
pressive craniectomy. Neurosurgery 2000;47:315–22.
[43] Pompucci A, Bonis PD, Pettorini B. Decompressive craniectomy for traumatic brain injury:
patient age and outcome. J Neurotrauma 2007;24:1182–8.
[44] Schlifka B. Lessons learned from OIF: a neurosurgical perspective. J Trauma 2007;62:
S103–4.
[45] Patel HC, Menon DK, Tebbs S, et al. Specialist neurocritical care and outcome from head
injury. Intensive Care Med 2002;28:547–53.
[46] Koenig MA, Bryan M, Lewin JL III, et al. Reversal of transtentorial herniation with hyper-
tonic saline. Neurology 2008;(70):1023–9.
[47] Marion DW, Firlik A, McLaughlin MR. Hyperventilation therapy for severe traumatic
brain injury. New Horiz 1995;3:439–47.
[48] Marion DW. Head and spinal cord injury. Neurol Clin 1998;16:485–502.
[49] Ling GS, Hanley DF. Infections of the central nervous system. In: Scheld WM, Whitley RJ,
Durak DT, editors. Neurocritical care of central nervous system infections. 2nd edition. New
York: Lippincott-Raven Press; 1997. p. 973–9.
[50] Jia X, Koenig MA, Shin HC, et al. Improving neurological outcomes post-cardiac arrest in
a rat model: immediate hypothermia and quantitative EEG monitoring. Resuscitation 2008;
76(3):431–42.
[51] Ware ML, Nemani VM, Meeker M, et al. Effects of 23.4% sodium chloride solution in re-
ducing intracranial pressure in patients with traumatic brain injury: a preliminary study.
Neurosurgery 2005;57:727–36.
[52] Qureshi AI, Suarez JI, Castro A, et al. Use of hypertonic saline/acetate infusion in treatment
of cerebral edema in patients with head trauma: experience at a single center. J Trauma 1999;
47:659–65.
426 LING & MARSHALL

[53] Shackford SR, Schmoker JD, Zhuang J. The effect of hypertonic resuscitation on pial arte-
riolar tone after brain injury and shock. J Trauma 1994;37:899–908.
[54] Ziai WC, Toung TJ, Bhardwaj A. Hypertonic saline: first-line therapy for cerebral edema?
J Neurol Sci 2007;261:157–66.
[55] Bullock R, Chesnut RM, Clifton G, et al. Guidelines for the management of severe head in-
jury. Brain trauma foundation. Eur J Emerg Med 1996;3:109–27.
[56] Muizelaar JP, Schroder ML. Overview of monitoring of cerebral blood flow and metabolism
after severe head injury. Can J Neurol Sci 1994;21:S6–11.
[57] Kelly DF, Goodale DB, Williams J, et al. Propofol in the treatment of moderate and severe
head injury: a randomized, prospective double-blinded pilot trial. J Neurosurg 1999;90:
1042–52.
[58] Armonda RA, Bell RS, Vo AH, et al. Wartime traumatic cerebral vasospasm: recent review
of combat casualties. Neurosurgery 2006;59:1215–25.
[59] Ling G, Ecklund J. Neuro-critical care in modern war. J Trauma 2007;62:S102.
[60] Wilson MS, Gibson CJ, Hamm RJ. Haloperidol, but not olanzapine, impairs cognitive per-
formance after traumatic brain injury in rats. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2003;82:871–9.
[61] Temkin NR, Haglund MM, Winn HR. Causes, prevention, and treatment of post-traumatic
epilepsy. New Horiz 1995;3:518–22.
[62] Wang H, Gao J, Lassiter TF, et al. Levetiracetam is neuroprotective in murine models of
closed head injury and subarachnoid hemorrhage. Neurocrit Care 2006;5:71–8.
[63] Clifton GL, Miller ER, Choi SC, et al. Lack of effect of induction of hypothermia after acute
brain injury. N Engl J Med 2001;344:556–63.
[64] Rogers FB, Cipolle MD, Velmahos G, et al. Practice management guidelines for the preven-
tion of venous thromboembolism in trauma patients: the EAST practice management guide-
lines work group. J Trauma 2002;53:142–64.
[65] Chung CY, Chen CL, Cheng PT, et al. Critical score of Glasgow Coma Scale for pediatric
traumatic brain injury. Pediatr Neurol 2006;34:379–87.
[66] Levy DE, Caronna JJ, Singer BH, et al. Predicting outcome from hypoxic-ischemic coma.
JAMA 1985;253:1420–6.
[67] MRC CRASH TRIAL Collaborators. Predicting outcome after traumatic brain injury:
practical prognostic models based on large cohort of international patients. BMJ
2008;(336):425–9.
[68] Hou DJ, Tong KA, Ashwal S, et al. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging im-
proves outcome prediction in adult traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma 2007;24:1558–69.
[69] Benson RR, Meda SA, Vasudevan S, et al. Global white matter analysis of diffusion tensor
images is predictive of injury severity in traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma 2007;24:
446–59.