Guidelines for the Management of Pediatric Severe Traumatic Brain Injury, Third Edition: Update of the Brain Trauma Foundation Guidelines

Severe Traumatic Brain Injury in Infants, Children, and Adolescents in 2019: Some Overdue Progress, Many Remaining Questions, and Exciting Ongoing Work in the Field of Traumatic Brain Injury Research In this Supplement to Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, we are pleased to present the Third Edition of the Guidelines for the Management of Pediatric Severe Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI). This body of work updates the Second Edition of the guidelines that was published in 2012 (1). It represents a substantial effort by a multidisciplinary group of individuals assembled to reflect the team approach to the treatment of these complex, critically ill patients that is essential to optimizing critical care and improving outcomes. This work also represents the strong and always-evolving partnership between investigators from the medical and research communities, forged in Chicago in 2000, from which the first pediatric TBI guidelines were developed. The mutual trust and respect we share have been the foundation of our commitment to bringing evidence-based care to children with TBI. Updating these guidelines was particularly exciting to the individuals who have participated in the previous two editions because several new studies have been published which begin to address a number of major gaps in the pediatric TBI literature—gaps that were specifically identified as targets for future research in earlier editions. For example, we are now able to include reports on the effects of commonly used sedatives and analgesics on intracranial pressure (ICP). Similarly, initial head-to-head comparisons of the influence of agents in routine “real world” use such as hypertonic saline (HTS), fentanyl, and others now inform these guidelines (2,3). A total of 48 new studies were included in this Third Edition. Although some progress has been made and should be celebrated, overall the level of evidence informing these guidelines remains low. High-quality randomized studies that could support level I recommendations remain absent; the available evidence produced only three level II recommendations, whereas most recommendations are level III, supported by low-quality evidence. Based in part on a number of requests from the readership to individual clinical investigators, we have included a companion article in the regular pages of Pediatric Critical Care Medicine that presents a “Critical Pathway” algorithm of care for both first-tier and second-tier (refractory intracranial hypertension) approaches. The algorithm reflects both the evidence-based recommendations from these guidelines and consensus-based expert opinion, vetted by the clinical investigators, where evidence was not available. An algorithm was provided in the First but not Second Editions of the guidelines, and we believe that given the new reports available, along with the existing gaps in evidence, a combination of evidence-based and consensus-based recommendations provides additional and much-needed guidance for clinicians at the bedside. The algorithm also addresses a number of issues that are important but were not previously covered in the guidelines, given the lack of research and the focus on evidence-based recommendations. This includes addressing issues such as a stepwise approach to elevated ICP, differences in tempo of therapy in different types of patients, scenarios with a rapidly escalating need for ICP-directed therapy in the setting of impending herniation, integration of multiple monitoring targets, and other complex issues such as minimal versus optimal therapeutic targets and approaches to weaning therapies. We hope that the readership finds the algorithm document helpful, recognizing that it represents a challenging albeit important step. Designing and developing this pediatric TBI evidence-based guidelines document required an expert administrative management team, and to that end, we are extremely grateful to the staff of the Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center, Oregon Health & Science University, for their vital contribution to this work. We are also grateful to the Brain Trauma Foundation and the Department of Defense for supporting the development and publication of these guidelines documents. We are grateful to the endorsing societies for recognizing the importance of this work and for the considerable work of the clinical investigators in constructing the final document. We are also pleased to have with the of and the that is the document of these guidelines for We are also grateful to for as along with the of this final document. we of the clinical investigators and on this We believe that the considerable and effort to this important to clinicians and the of children with TBI. investigators provided of at the of the which were at the of clinical made provided on for which were an it is important to that these guidelines were as the and in Pediatric TBI of the most important in the of pediatric was to a The of of pediatric TBI and is of the in TBI as a This new in the importance of TBI has in part from the of the of TBI the particularly and from the need for new and new for TBI in both children and In the between TBI and a number of have the in have to additional support of TBI and have produced an level of research in TBI and a for new We that the of along with of other and research in the new and the medical management of and with and of the recommendations in these documents. We that we for the team of clinical investigators in the to additional evidence future updates of these The for developing these guidelines were in two a and of the and use of that as the foundation for evidence-based recommendations. guidelines are the of the evidence-based Based on of the team of clinical investigators and is in and to the of evidence-based to recommendations, and is to the between evidence and It is important that this is to and future research that the evidence for TBI these guidelines only recommendations on available evidence, most not for of clinical begin with evidence-based guidelines, and use clinical and to the gaps where evidence is The is to use the evidence and the evidence-based recommendations as the to which and be to to clinical Research In a from developing this Third Edition of the guidelines, the team in a and produced the algorithm for treatment of TBI in pediatric for guidelines, and future The the of from available evidence to a The to gaps that future research and consensus-based clinical that both of which to a of new the we used to the and evidence-based recommendations. The used to the algorithm are in that document and of the for the for studies for the of and publication The for are as TBI The team to from the Second Edition of these new were The are in three that are to TBI in and pressure therapy and for This Edition. for this are and are provided in The clinical investigators and team identified three important for pediatric patients with overall new were to the evidence for The of was to are provided as level In some from the were not included in this Edition. for previously included studies was on of that our earlier work Similarly, we recommendations from the Edition the provided new and of The research who on the Second Edition and the for that and the for this Third Edition. was from to of and an was to include published and of by that were not in the were and were included in the final The is in and for in the were by two of the were for at on the team article and it the The included and for were also by clinical investigators who the on and were available for by The for were as the was pediatric patients with TBI as of and the an included with that included other TBI were evidence was not available. between were by a A of studies is in of and evidence from studies that important between two between an group and a group that the of in this pediatric patients with TBI. evidence was not available, evidence was used to support a evidence has been in previous work by this team and other evidence-based In this we included two types of evidence. in an Health In some is a lack of evidence that of a treatment in such as but is evidence in an which is with The most for the treatment of TBI is management of studies in the of this that patients is at a have and a the clinical investigators to of as an important and use the available evidence to support the recommendations monitoring and for to and evidence of this were used in three for this of the and In of these an was used as the evidence was that evidence was available management of the with For the was evidence that patients with was used to support the For the were of were pediatric studies that to outcomes. was evidence of an between and studies that this were used as evidence. For the were and and In some evidence was we studies that included patients with and and the to different our is the in the the of the in the the of the of are differences in to influence the In these differences influence the In this evidence from studies with was included in the and and evidence was it is in the the of the body of evidence. of included studies were for for which is an approach to the of an individual This is a of It is an approach to and studies in of the and issues such as and The used for this are in the for the randomized studies of and the as evidence on the combination of and is the and is to includes and is the and is given to low-quality to low-quality and treatment and other in were the of a as were from studies by a of the team and for by a was the and of included are in the of for are available The final of the evidence is the of individual studies that the clinical investigators and the team use to recommendations. This is for in the of the the and the of and For treatment the clinical investigators identified important clinical The studies in were to This the of the and the were several studies that the could be The of this is included in the of the of for For this we not for which was to For this the evidence was of the of the of the body of evidence the of the included individual the of the the evidence provided is and the of the of the outcomes. The and are and are given in In the number of studies and number of included are Based on an overall is made as to the of the body of evidence is The of the body of evidence for is included in a in the recommendations. of This the of the individual It studies are and is the to which the and are It is are are is It is not the body of evidence of a We as the is the as the of and the are clinical outcomes. is as is the of the for a given is low. this is on the of used in a but include of the of other of the of used to are a to the body of evidence. The are as that the evidence reflects the research is to the in the of that the evidence reflects the research the in the of and the that the evidence reflects the research is to the in the of and is to the is not a A of of the body of evidence a the importance of the and these and The are provided to the that are but are not as two studies for a the overall of the body of evidence be as because is the Similarly, studies that evidence only low-quality evidence In some the body of evidence be a but the A a body of evidence it is a a body of evidence it is a with a and evidence the is and the of the of is low. is the to which research are for informing recommendations for a the that is the of the is important to on the and the is is for focus on the of the to which patients are the and the for care where could a be the the for the be that The of the setting in which a was also be important to For example, a in a not be to other on the are to the of the of the is to the care setting of to be include the and the of level of The and of are because it is that the patients, and available are different In this we the of individual studies in the of the of and the recommendations. of of studies the evidence on which the recommendations are our of evidence is but not for the development of recommendations. recommendations were made a in evidence. evidence was it could be used to inform recommendations was on the of the body of evidence and of were in which evidence was but the was and our to the evidence recommendations. a was not the evidence was included for future because in the new studies be in in the of the of the body of evidence. of in this are as level level level The level of is by the of the of the body of evidence, the of the included The were on the of the body of evidence as I recommendations were on a body of evidence. II recommendations were on a body of evidence. recommendations were on a low-quality body of evidence. could in a level a body of with In this was not used to a given the lack of and in this we issues that were identified and by the clinical was used in where were studies identified because the body of evidence major the evidence was recommendations were and of the of new and the team for to two clinical The clinical investigators the included studies and the recommendations, provided and additional studies for team the and new and provided the clinical investigators with new and a of the evidence for In a in was and by the Based on these the team the of The of and the other of the guidelines was to clinical investigators for and and to the and the document. were made on from the clinical investigators, the Third Edition and an were to the Pediatric Critical Care Medicine for A was also by of the of of Guidelines in with the clinical investigators and team, to publication in the of I and II was evidence to support a level I II for this of monitoring is Edition. are from the Second Edition to the recommendations. new studies were to the evidence for this to the TBI is a of a of that of and and of and Brain from and the of the to intracranial and of represents a in the of TBI the in both and TBI have been care management that on the of and medical and treatment of intracranial that a with of monitoring in by ICP-directed medical in a two Similarly, TBI in an which the overall of monitoring in these patients to the of to are by the therapeutic that have been with monitoring and have not been to include and treatment of and treatment of to and and studies an between intracranial and TBI It is intracranial to intracranial is the of pressure and is the most available of The of monitoring as a of and versus of is also The lack of on monitoring the of the recommendations in the previous of the Guidelines for the Management of Pediatric Severe TBI This of strong evidence in children is with of management in the and In a in in patients in therapy therapy Although the in this are not by the patients and have the evidence for monitoring in TBI and of at individual A of and for such patients and with guidelines recommendations In the in only of children with TBI with only of clinical for such children monitoring The use of monitoring in children with TBI be use of monitoring in only of patients in this group at multiple in the of is also in the use of for the treatment of intracranial at different a is required to have an of for critical care the of monitoring are to be supported of the of the of included for this address the the from the to inform treatment for pediatric patients with TBI. patients as the of and as the of low-quality evidence to support the two studies studies and three treatment provided evidence that is with outcomes. The overall of the body of evidence is of the of The studies evidence from in the The were in that two for patients who are and the The studies and treatment were in the and were major of the studies provided evidence to support the studies from the Second Edition provided evidence that patients with have of Severe TBI at of A number of studies a of intracranial in children with TBI Some of these studies identified other clinical in combination with TBI in a are of a of intracranial In these patients, on is for the of intracranial In a of patients of from of children an initial but at some their care also be in children with TBI who not who studies that children with TBI are at for intracranial have been identified which the of intracranial monitoring in this and to intracranial are not available. in Pediatric Severe studies pediatric patients an between intracranial and of 48 patients to a between intracranial and but in this children with were and with studies that is an important It also a strong both and as a of in the management of pediatric TBI and studies evidence for the for this patients as the of and as the of and and that clinical were with the use of monitoring for the of intracranial and that the use of monitoring versus monitoring was with a in in patients but also monitoring of was in only of patients who monitoring the monitoring group a and In of the Pediatric Health that with monitoring with of a by a that two with monitoring and in between between monitoring and but an between monitoring and to The group treatment the and that the could be to differences between the that have to the treatment studies evidence to support the for this For example, two studies of treatment that clinical are with of intracranial A of children with TBI with of and that children was children was intracranial hypertension) A of a TBI that and in children with TBI were with intracranial to In this of ICP, of treatment was to be The to and use monitoring on the and from the that evidence-based are other that a with intracranial it is that is to intracranial is that of present care is on and treatment of elevated ICP, of elevated with monitoring is to be of for and of treatment the use of an Although only evidence for to these studies support the of management of intracranial with and Guidelines with the recommendations in this the Edition of the guidelines provides a level to of I and II was evidence to support a level I II for this monitoring is a level is was evidence to support a for the use of a of to outcomes. of should only be for patients with to such as and for patients who not have a of the Edition. are from the Second Edition to the recommendations. The are new to this new treatment were to the evidence for this monitoring and In children with the to monitoring of such as and of patients treatment and is to and the use of these monitoring be as part of optimal critical care of the of the of included for this the use of to for children with and should be for of and studies were identified that the use of monitoring and their use to in outcomes. treatment and the evidence for the a monitoring was The studies were with and evidence. The overall of the body of evidence is of the of The included studies were and at included a of for pediatric were in the and two in The of the evidence is of studies two new and two from the Second provided evidence to support the included patients from of the treatment of for of and The studies that on this for an between and of monitoring of children with TBI who were to a at were and the and for outcomes. the was and the of in patients with intracranial and the need for studies to be a complex between and used a treatment of and an of with which was for In of a of the patients, that in patients in to in were also an between and this evidence that this monitoring is it be to the of Although these studies that are with to some the complex and the studies were not to the of to to the of to other Guidelines to evidence, are recommendations in the Edition of the guidelines monitoring of I and II was evidence to support a level I II for this the of elevated on the of a initial of the is not in pediatric a the and initial is not for is evidence of the Edition. is new to this new and treatment to the evidence for this of the is the for of intracranial of for with TBI. is in initial and of intracranial is these patients The of and are with of with in children in a to Although an has been an to ICP, a remains the of intracranial in patients with a In the Second and Third Editions of the TBI guidelines, monitoring was for patients with a initial two were pressure The First and Second Editions of the Pediatric TBI Guidelines this for the Edition of the TBI guidelines, this was to lack of evidence and for monitoring has been for and children with TBI. An initial is to intracranial need for and for of intracranial routine is a in children with TBI is is evidence of an to of the of the of included for this the initial should be used to intracranial and routine the initial should be used to The overall of the body of evidence is and is on new treatment new and from the Second Edition of these guidelines of the of The recommendations are supported by three studies is of new and from the Second evidence to support the recommendations of of to a of to pediatric TBI to with monitoring and to to be by initial were in of children with initial and and of with and to of children with an initial but who were to by a pediatric initial the first of pressure This of patients a and low-quality evidence to support the to not the of intracranial on a initial of to and a of children with and TBI a routine with for the patients who of intracranial on two in patients who were and of intracranial TBI. The other three were because of and of The of monitoring an initial was not in with of intracranial versus with pediatric patients from to for and to were routine of these and patients a supported by of the of of a and three for additional were on a clinical not as routine reports by and and were studies at a for routine initial also the of evidence is to support the use of to Guidelines The guidelines not include as a for of of I and II was evidence to support a level I II for this of a of is Edition. are from the Second Edition to the recommendations. new studies were to the evidence for this and from the Second Edition was In children with is to in ICP, as intracranial management of TBI in the is on the management of and of as by the at intracranial is to care of these of intracranial is also to be important to to a of in that to in are to be some have that in patients of to for to treatment Based in part on an treatment of has been used in most for for and are in particularly in and but optimal in the is It has been in children TBI that the of of is in children versus not children have For example, the in between and the of is in and children it is in This the need to a therapeutic to for and children with children with TBI. Although an of is an be for and It should also be that some of the studies the used that are such as in of the of the and in pediatric management need to be in some of the of the of included for this the the for intracranial to the outcomes. The evidence of and two studies evidence The is and a overall of evidence for of of the of The included studies were in and of the have and most have other that their of two new and from the Second Edition evidence to support the recommendations for of of the to the studies different for The patients in who were the of were a of the pediatric patients in of and with and used of was in at in In a of a of treatment for at different to for for for in children with versus but not the of different by on studies used the of as the of intracranial in on for 48 patients and at and for patients with The a total of patients, in patients with to and treatment In a of pediatric patients, used the of as the of intracranial and in the versus group the at In a of pediatric patients, that an of was the of the at A with studies of is the studies were with an for as the a therapeutic for some In approaches were used to for in the between and important was that was approach to the between and the of intracranial TBI. a given were the available evidence provides a level Guidelines The Edition of the TBI guidelines provides a level that a combination of and clinical and be used to management This is also in pediatric for of I and II was evidence to support a level I II for this to a at a of is A between and is to that the of is not be with at the and at the of this Edition. are from the Second Edition to the recommendations. the included studies are new to this new and three new studies were to the evidence for this by the the pressure in in the is and with for to the of in by which is a of in is a in monitoring of and ICP, be and by that to both and The optimal for therapy remains are differences in and from pediatric are in we need to are targets for that should be used critical care management of pediatric TBI. are three in from studies for the of is is an that should be in be a with the of which to of for and and the of these differences to a of to the between the two the of not only reflects intracranial and but also the level that is by at the bedside. is considerable in the with respect to their of the that is used in the is different in of the studies and only the of the reports not these are included should be the from the pediatric TBI studies and the to treatment for TBI. of the of the of included for this the are the and for are and is the for studies provided low-quality evidence supporting a of and use of Although provided supporting use of it was not to a level II from two studies was to a to of the of of the studies were published The body of evidence included studies and use of from multiple included the and Although two studies on the a of are major of the studies in the evidence to support the recommendations for this new two new and studies from the Second Edition and of of and in the and for and A of to therapy for the evidence but for the evidence the first of care as as for the total of care The used in patients and in patients and

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.