Skip to main content

Clinical experience with the noninvasive ICP monitoring system

  • Conference paper
Intracranial Pressure and Brain Monitoring XII

Part of the book series: Acta Neurochirurgica Supplementum ((NEUROCHIRURGICA,volume 95))

Summary

The Noninvasive ICP (Intracranial Pressure) Monitoring System NIP-200/210 has been used in several hospitals with more than 2000 patients since March 2002. It is based on the N2 wave response to flash visual evoked potentials (FVEP). According to our data, the mean latency period for the FVEP-induced N2 wave in healthy controls was 126.61 ± 14.64 ms, in which that of females was shorter than that of males (123.95 ± 10.345 ms vs. 130.75 ± 14.632 ms; p<0.05). There was no significant difference between the left or right side response (126.71 ± 14.91 ms vs. 124.468 ± 15.043 ms, p>0.05). No significant difference in latency was found across age groups in our patient pool. In general, the N2 wave was stable and easily identified in most of the patients or healthy controls. When the data obtained with the NIP-200/210 Noninvasive ICP Monitoring System was compared with that from invasive techniques, the results were quite consistent (correlation index 0.651–0.97, standard error 8–15%). From our clinical trial results, we conclude that the latency periods for the FVEP-induced N2 wave reflected ICP values. However this technique is not suitable in patients with bifrontal hematoma, retinal concussion, or contusion of the optical nerve, because an FVEP value cannot be measured accurately in these cases. In our clinical trials, we used the FVEP technique to determine the effectiveness of mannitol in decreasing the ICP. The data revealed that ICP values decreased significantly within 20 minutes after a mannitol injection, and reached a minimum level at 40 minutes. For a single bolus of mannitol, the duration of the ICP decrease ranged from 30–210 minutes. Elevated ICP is one of the most important clinical issues in neurosurgery and neurology. The present noninvasive technique is safe and easy to perform, with a minimal risk of complications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Martinez-Manas RM, Santamarta D, Campos JMD, et al (2000) Camino intracranial pressure monitor: prospective study of accuracy and complications. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 69: 82

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Zhang Dan, Peng Guoguang (2000) The advancements of noninvasive ICP monitoring technology. Foreign Med Sci (Cerebrovasc Dis) 8: 234

    Google Scholar 

  3. Donald H, Pullam YMW, Rosenfeld JG (1981) Relationship between visual evoked potentials and intracranial pressure. J Neurosurg 55: 909

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. York D, Legan M, Benner S, et al (1984) Further studies with a noninvasive method of intracranial pressure estimation. Neurosurgrey 14: 456

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Burrows FA, Hillier SC, Mcleod ME, et al (1990) Anterior fontanel pressure and visual evoked potentials in neonates and infants undergoing profound hypothermic circulatory arrest. Anesthsiology 73: 632

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Liu Jianjun, Yue Yun, Cai Wei, et al (1998) The feasibility of noninvasively monitoring ICP through visual evoked potential and brain stem auditory evoked potential. Chin J Anesthesiol 18: 173

    Google Scholar 

  7. Davenport A, Bramley PN (1993) Cerebral function analyzing monitoring and visual evoked potientials as a noninvasive method of detecting dysfunction in patients with acute hepatic and renal failure treated with intermittent machine hemofiltration. Renal Failure 15: 515

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Gumerlock MK, York D, Durkis D (1994) Visual evoked responeses as a monitor of intracranial pressure during hyperosmolar blood-brain barrier disruption. Acta Neurochir (Wien) [Suppl] 60: 132

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Jordan KG (1993) Continuous EEG and evoked potential monitoring in the neuroscience intensive care unit. J Clin Neurophysiol 10: 445

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Desch LW (2001) Longitudinal stability of visual evoked potentials in children and adolescents with hydrocephalus. Dev Med Child Neurol 43: 113–117

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Zhong J, Dujovny M, Park HK, et al (2003) Advances in ICP monitoring techniques. Neurol Res 25: 339–350

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Y. L. Zhao .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Springer-Verlag

About this paper

Cite this paper

Zhao, Y.L., Zhou, J.Y., Zhu, G.H. (2005). Clinical experience with the noninvasive ICP monitoring system. In: Poon, W.S., et al. Intracranial Pressure and Brain Monitoring XII. Acta Neurochirurgica Supplementum, vol 95. Springer, Vienna. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-211-32318-X_72

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-211-32318-X_72

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Vienna

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-211-24336-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-211-32318-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics