Neuromonitoring in the ICU - what, how and why?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We selectively review emerging noninvasive neuromonitoring techniques and the evidence that supports their use in the ICU setting. The focus is on neuromonitoring research in patients with acute brain injury. RECENT FINDINGS: Noninvasive intracranial pressure evaluation with optic nerve sheath diameter measurements, transcranial Doppler waveform analysis, or skull mechanical extensometer waveform recordings have potential safety and resource-intensity advantages when compared to standard invasive monitors, however each of these techniques has limitations. Quantitative electroencephalography can be applied for detection of cerebral ischemia and states of covert consciousness. Near-infrared spectroscopy may be leveraged for cerebral oxygenation and autoregulation computation. Automated quantitative pupillometry and heart rate variability analysis have been shown to have diagnostic and/or prognostic significance in selected subtypes of acute brain injury. Finally, artificial intelligence is likely to transform interpretation and deployment of neuromonitoring paradigms individually and when integrated in multimodal paradigms. SUMMARY: The ability to detect brain dysfunction and injury in critically ill patients is being enriched thanks to remarkable advances in neuromonitoring data acquisition and analysis. Studies are needed to validate the accuracy and reliability of these new approaches, and their feasibility and implementation within existing intensive care workflows.

Coagulopathy in Isolated Traumatic Brain Injury: Myth or Reality.

INTRODUCTION: Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) has been shown to be associated with altered hemostasis and coagulopathy, that correlates with worsening secondary injury and clinical outcomes. Isolated Traumatic Brain Injury (iTBI), that is TBI without significant extracranial injuries, has also been shown to be associated with systemic coagulopathy and derangements in hemostasis. METHODS: Literature Review. RESULTS: Present your results in logical sequence in the text, tables, and figures, giving the main or most important findings first. Do not repeat all the data in the tables or figures in the text; emphasize or summarize only the most important observations. Provide data on all primary and secondary outcomes identified in the Methods section. Give numeric results not only as derivatives (e.g. percentages) but also as the absolute numbers from which the derivatives were calculated, and specify the statistical significance attached to them, if any. DISCUSSION: In this review, we provide an overview of the pathophysiology of the hemostatic disturbances caused by iTBI, review key clinical findings and discrepancies in the way this question has been approached, describe the use and role of global viscoelastic assays such as the thromboelastrogram, and detail principles for reversal of pre-injury blood thinners. CONCLUSIONS: iTBI is clearly associated with the development of coagulopathy, but the extent to which it occurs is confounded by the fact that many of the studies have included patients with moderate extracranial trauma into the iTBI category. The coagulopathy itself has been better studied in preclinical models, and the mechanisms driving it suggest a pattern consistent with disseminated intravascular coagulation with hyperfibrinolysis. We provide pragmatic clinical takeaways and suggestions for future research.

Picking the optimal target for antibody-drug conjugates.

Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) combine the cytotoxic potential of chemotherapeutic drugs with the specificity of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). After many years of unfulfilled promise, the field of ADCs is experiencing resurgence as more is learned about each of the components of an ADC and how these components need to be combined to produce a successful therapeutic agent. Choosing an appropriate target for ADCs is a critical parameter that effects the efficacy, therapeutic window, and toxicity profile of ADCs. This review will focus on the concepts underlying the choice of the target, review specific current ADCs and their targets, and look to the future of ADCs.

Neuroprotective drug riluzole amplifies the heat shock factor 1 (HSF1)- and glutamate transporter 1 (GLT1)-dependent cytoprotective mechanisms for neuronal survival.

Heat shock factor 1 (HSF1) mediates the cellular response to stress to increase the production of heat shock protein (HSP) chaperones for proper protein folding, trafficking, and degradation; failure of this homeostatic mechanism likely contributes to neurodegeneration. We show that the neuroprotective drug riluzole increased the amount of HSF1 in NG108-15 neuroprogenitor cells by slowing the specific turnover of HSF1 and supporting a more robust and sustained activation of HSF1. Using Hsp70-luciferase as a functional readout of the activity of HSF1, we show that riluzole amplified the heat shock induction of the reporter gene with an optimal increase at 1 µM. Immunocytochemical staining and Western blot quantitation of HSP70 in NG108-15 neuroprogenitor cells and embryonic spinal cord neurons provided corroborative evidence that riluzole amplified the HSF1-dependent regulation of HSP70 expression. Parallel studies on the GLT1 glutamate transporter showed that riluzole increased GLT1-reporter and GLT1 protein expression and that the increase was enhanced by heat shock and coincident with the increased expression of HSP70 and HSP90. This result is consistent with the anti-glutamatergic profile of riluzole and the presence of multiple heat shock elements on the GLT1 gene promoter, suggesting that riluzole may modulate GLT1 expression through HSF1. The increased HSP chaperones and GLT1 transporter blunted glutamate-induced and N-methyl D-aspartate receptor-mediated excitotoxic death. In summary, we show that riluzole increased the amount and activity of HSF1 to boost the expression of HSPs and GLT1 for neuroprotection under stress.