Short pressure reactivity index versus long pressure reactivity index in the management of traumatic brain injury

OBJECT The pressure reactivity index (PRx) correlates with outcome after traumatic brain injury (TBI) and is used to calculate optimal cerebral perfusion pressure (CPPopt). The PRx is a correlation coefficient between slow, spontaneous changes (0.003–0.05 Hz) in intracranial pressure (ICP) and arterial blood pressure (ABP). A novel index—the so-called long PRx (L-PRx)—that considers ABP and ICP changes (0.0008–0.008 Hz) was proposed. METHODS The authors compared PRx and L-PRx for 6-month outcome prediction and CPPopt calculation in 307 patients with TBI. The PRx- and L-PRx–based CPPopt were determined and the predictive power and discriminant abilities were compared. RESULTS The PRx and L-PRx correlation was good (R = 0.7, p < 0.00001; Spearman test). The PRx, age, CPP, and Glasgow Coma Scale score but not L-PRx were significant fatal outcome predictors (death and persistent vegetative state). There was a significant difference between the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves calculated for PRx and L-PRx (0.61 ± 0.04 vs 0.51 ± 0.04; z-statistic = −3.26, p = 0.011), which indicates a better ability by PRx than L-PRx to predict fatal outcome. The CPPopt was higher for L-PRx than for PRx, without a statistical difference (median CPPopt for L-PRx: 76.9 mm Hg, interquartile range [IQR] ± 10.1 mm Hg; median CPPopt for PRx: 74.7 mm Hg, IQR ± 8.2 mm Hg). Death was associated with CPP below CPPopt for PRx (χ2 = 30.6, p < 0.00001), and severe disability was associated with CPP above CPPopt for PRx (χ2 = 7.8, p = 0.005). These relationships were not statistically significant for CPPopt for L-PRx. CONCLUSIONS The PRx is superior to the L-PRx for TBI outcome prediction. Individual CPPopt for L-PRx and PRx are not statistically different. Deviations between CPP and CPPopt for PRx are relevant for outcome prediction; those between CPP and CPPopt for L-PRx are not. The PRx uses the entire B-wave spectrum for index calculation, whereas the L-PRX covers only one-third of it. This may explain the performance discrepancy.