Advertisement

Intensive Care Medicine

, Volume 44, Issue 8, pp 1284–1294 | Cite as

Optic nerve sheath diameter measured sonographically as non-invasive estimator of intracranial pressure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Chiara Robba
  • Gregorio Santori
  • Marek Czosnyka
  • Francesco Corradi
  • Nicola Bragazzi
  • Llewellyn Padayachy
  • Fabio Silvio Taccone
  • Giuseppe Citerio
Systematic Review

Summary

Purpose

Although invasive intracranial devices (IIDs) are the gold standard for intracranial pressure (ICP) measurement, ultrasonography of the optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD) has been suggested as a potential non-invasive ICP estimator. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of sonographic ONSD measurement for assessment of intracranial hypertension (IH) in adult patients.

Methods

We searched on electronic databases (MEDLINE/PubMed®, Scopus®, Web of Science®, ScienceDirect®, Cochrane Library®) until 31 May 2018 for comparative studies that evaluated the efficacy of sonographic ONSD vs. ICP measurement with IID. Data were extracted independently by two authors. We used the QUADAS-2 tool for assessing the risk of bias (RB) of each study. A diagnostic meta-analysis following the bivariate approach and random-effects model was performed.

Results

Seven prospective studies (320 patients) were evaluated for IH detection (assumed with ICP > 20 mmHg or > 25 cmH2O). The accuracy of included studies ranged from 0.811 (95% CI 0.678‒0.847) to 0.954 (95% CI 0.853‒0.983). Three studies were at high RB. No significant heterogeneity was found for the diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), positive likelihood ratio (PLR) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR), with I2 < 50% for each parameter. The pooled DOR, PLR and NLR were 67.5 (95% CI 29‒135), 5.35 (95% CI 3.76‒7.53) and 0.088 (95% CI 0.046‒0.152), respectively. The area under the hierarchical summary receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUHSROC) was 0.938. In the subset of five studies (275 patients) with IH defined for ICP > 20 mmHg, the pooled DOR, PLR and NLR were 68.10 (95% CI 26.8‒144), 5.18 (95% CI 3.59‒7.37) and 0.087 (95% CI 0.041‒0.158), respectively, while the AUHSROC was 0.932.

Conclusions

Although the wide 95% CI in our pooled DOR suggests caution, ultrasonographic ONSD may be a potentially useful approach for assessing IH when IIDs are not indicated or available (CRD42018089137, PROSPERO).

Keywords

Intracranial pressure Invasive intracranial devices Optic nerve sheath diameter Ultrasonography Adult patients Meta-analysis 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

None of the authors have any potential conflict of interest associated with this study.

Ethics and dissemination

Formal ethical approval was not required as primary data were not collected.

Supplementary material

134_2018_5305_MOESM1_ESM.docx (179 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 179 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Marmarou A, Anderson RL, Ward JD et al (1991) Impact of ICP instability and hypotension on outcome in patients with severe head trauma. J Neurosurg 75(Suppl 1):S59–S66Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Holloway KL, Barnes T, Choi S et al (1996) Ventriculostomy infections: the effect of monitoring duration and catheter exchange in 584 patients. J Neurosurg 85:419–424.  https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.1996.85.3.0419 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hoefnagel D, Dammers R, Ter Laak-Poort MP, Avezaat CJJ (2008) Risk factors for infections related to external ventricular drainage. Acta Neurochir 150:209–214.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-007-1458-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Robba C, Bacigaluppi S, Cardim D, Donnelly J, Bertuccio A, Czosnyka M (2016) Non-invasive assessment of intracranial pressure. Acta Neurol Scand 134:4–21.  https://doi.org/10.1111/ane.12527 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Moretti R, Pizzi B (2011) Ultrasonography of the optic nerve in neurocritically ill patients. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 55:644–652.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-6576.2011.02432.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sekhon MS, Griesdale DE, Robba C et al (2014) Optic nerve sheath diameter on computed tomography is correlated with simultaneously measured intracranial pressure in patients with severe traumatic brain injury. Intensive Care Med 40:1267–1274.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-014-3392-7 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Geeraerts T, Newcombe VFJ, Coles JP et al (2008) Use of T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging of the optic nerve sheath to detect raised intracranial pressure. Crit Care 12:R114.  https://doi.org/10.1186/cc7006 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Geeraerts T, Merceron S, Benhamou D, Vigué B, Duranteau J (2008) Non-invasive assessment of intracranial pressure using ocular sonography in neurocritical care patients. Intensive Care Med 34:2062–2067.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-008-1149-x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Amini A, Kariman H, Arhami Dolatabadi A et al (2013) Use of the sonographic diameter of optic nerve sheath to estimate intracranial pressure. Am J Emerg Med 31:236–239.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2012.06.025 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Strumwasser A, Kwan RO, Yeung L et al (2011) Sonographic optic nerve sheath diameter as an estimate of intracranial pressure in adult trauma. J Surg Res 170:265–271.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2011.03.009 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dubourg J, Javouhey E, Geeraerts T, Messerer M, Kassai B (2011) Ultrasonography of optic nerve sheath diameter for detection of raised intracranial pressure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med 37:1059–1068.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-011-2224-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Robba C, Cardim D, Tajsic T et al (2017) Ultrasound non-invasive measurement of intracranial pressure in neurointensive care: a prospective observational study. PLoS Med 14:e1002356.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002356 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    McInnes MDF, Moher D, Thombs BD et al (2018) Preferred reporting items for a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies: the PRISMA-DTA statement. JAMA 319:388–396.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.19163 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE et al (2008) GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 336:924–926.  https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39489.470347 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Whiting PF, Rutjes AWS, Westwood ME et al (2011) QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Int Med 155:529–536.  https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-155-8-201110180-00009 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Reitsma JB, Glas AS, Rutjes AWS, Scholten RJPM, Bossuyt PM, Zwinderman AH (2005) Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 58:982–990.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.02.022 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Liu Z, Yao Z, Li C, Liu X, Chen H, Gao C (2013) A step-by-step guide to the systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic and prognostic test accuracy evaluations. Br J Cancer 108:2299–2303.  https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2013.185 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zwinderman AH, Bossuyt PM (2008) We should not pool diagnostic likelihood ratios in systematic reviews. Stat Med 27:687–697.  https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.2992 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Doebler P, Holling H, Böhning D (2012) A mixed model approach to meta-analysis of diagnostic studies with binary test outcome. Psychol Methods 17:418–436.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028091 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Duval S, Tweedie R (2000) Trim and fill: a simple funnel-plot-based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics 56:455–463.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0006-341X.2000.00455.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    DerSimonian R, Laird N (1986) Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 7:177–188.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Doebler P (2017) mada: meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy. R package version 0.5.8. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/mada/index.html. Accessed 19 June 2018
  23. 23.
    Viechtbauer W (2010) Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. J Stat Softw 36:1–48.  https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v036.i03 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Debray T, de Jong V (2017) metamisc: diagnostic and prognostic meta-analysis. R package version 0.1.7. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/metamisc/index.html. Accessed 19 June 2018
  25. 25.
    Mehrpour M, Oliaee Torshizi F, Esmaeeli S, Taghipour S, Abdollahi S (2015) Optic nerve sonography in the diagnostic evaluation of pseudopapilledema and raised intracranial pressure: a cross-sectional study. Neurol Res Int 2015:146059.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/146059 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rajajee V, Vanaman M, Fletcher JJ, Jacobs TL (2011) Optic nerve ultrasound for the detection of raised intracranial pressure. Neurocrit Care 15:506–515.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-011-9606-8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Moretti R, Pizzi B (2009) Optic nerve ultrasound for detection of intracranial hypertension in intracranial hemorrhage patients confirmation of previous findings in a different patient population. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol 21:16–20.  https://doi.org/10.1097/ANA.0b013e318185996a CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Geeraerts T, Launey Y, Martin L et al (2007) Ultrasonography of the optic nerve sheath may be useful for detecting raised intracranial pressure after severe brain injury. Intensive Care Med 33:1704–1711.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-007-0797-6 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jeon JP, Lee SU, Kim SE et al (2017) Correlation of optic nerve sheath diameter with directly measured intracranial pressure in Korean adults using bedside ultrasonography. PLoS One 12:e0183170.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0183170 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kimberly HH, Shah S, Marill K, Noble V (2008) Correlation of optic nerve sheath diameter with direct measurement of intracranial pressure. Acad Emerg Med 15:201–204.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1553-2712.2007.00031.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    del Saz-Saucedo P, Redondo-González O, Mateu-Mateu Á, Huertas-Arroyo R, García-Ruiz R, Botia-Paniagua E (2016) Sonographic assessment of the optic nerve sheath diameter in the diagnosis of idiopathic intracranial hypertension. J Neurol Sci 361:122–127.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jns.2015.12.032 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Anderson RC, Kan P, Klimo P, Brockmeyer DL, Walker ML, Kestle JR (2004) Complications of intracranial pressure monitoring in children with head trauma. J Neurosurg 101(Suppl 1):53–58.  https://doi.org/10.3171/ped.2004.101.2.0053 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Dubourg J, Messerer M, Karakitsos D et al (2013) Individual patient data systematic review and meta-analysis of optic nerve sheath diameter ultrasonography for detecting raised intracranial pressure: protocol of the ONSD research group. Syst Rev 2:62.  https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-2-62 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Nabeta HW, Bahr NC, Rhein J et al (2014) Accuracy of noninvasive intraocular pressure or optic nerve sheath diameter measurements for predicting elevated intracranial pressure in cryptococcal meningitis. Open Forum Infect Dis 1:ofu093.  https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofu093 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wang LJ, Chen LM, Chen Y, Bao LY, Zheng NN, Wang YZ, Xing YQ (2018) Ultrasonography assessments of optic nerve sheath diameter as a noninvasive and dynamic method of detecting changes in intracranial pressure. JAMA Ophthalmol 136:250–256.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2017.6560 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sterne JAC, Gavaghan D, Egger M (2000) Publication and related bias in meta-analysis: power of statistical tests and prevalence in the literature. J Clin Epidemiol 53:1119–1129.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(00)00242-0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    PROSPERO. York, England: Centre for reviews and dissemination, University of York. http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/. Accessed 19 June 2018
  38. 38.
    Tsujimoto Y, Tsujimoto H, Kataoka Y et al (2016) Majority of systematic reviews published in high-impact journals neglected to register the protocols: a meta-epidemiological study. J Clin Epidemiol 84:54–60.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.02.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Tricco AC, Cogo E, Page MJ et al (2016) A third of systematic reviews changed or did not specify the primary outcome: a PROSPERO register study. J Clin Epidemiol 79:46–54.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.03.025 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ballantyne SA, O’Neill G, Hamilton R, Hollman AS (2002) Observer variation in the sonographic measurement of optic nerve sheath diameter in normal adults. Eur J Ultrasound 15:145–149.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0929-8266(02)00036-8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Tayal VS, Neulander M, Norton HJ, Foster T, Saunders T, Blaivas M (2007) Emergency department sonographic measurement of optic nerve sheath diameter to detect findings of increased intracranial pressure in adult head injury patients. Ann Emerg Med 49:508–514.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2006.06.040 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Bäuerle J, Niesen WD, Egger K, Buttler KJ, Reinhard M (2016) Enlarged optic nerve sheath in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage despite normal intracranial pressure. J Neuroimaging 26:194–196.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jon.12287 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Bratton SL, Chestnut RM, Ghajar J et al (2007) Guidelines for the management of severe traumatic brain injury. VI. Indications for intracranial pressure monitoring. J Neurotrauma 24(Suppl 1):S37–S44.  https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2007.9990 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Robba C, Citerio G (2017) Focus on brain injury. Intensive Care Med 43:1418–1420.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-017-4869-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Asehnoune K, Balogh Z, Citerio G et al (2017) The research agenda for trauma critical care. Intensive Care Med 43:1340–1351.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-017-4895-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Cnossen MC, Huijben JA, Van Der Jagt M et al (2017) Variation in monitoring and treatment policies for intracranial hypertension in traumatic brain injury: a survey in 66 neurotrauma centers participating in the CENTER-TBI study. Crit Care 21:233.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-017-1816-9 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Robba C, Cardim D, Donnelly J et al (2016) Effects of pneumoperitoneum and Trendelenburg position on intracranial pressure assessed using different non-invasive methods. Br J Anaesth 117:783–791.  https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aew356 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Robba C, Bragazzi NL, Bertuccio A et al (2017) Effects of prone position and positive end-expiratory pressure on noninvasive estimators of ICP: a pilot study. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol 29:243–250.  https://doi.org/10.1097/ANA.0000000000000295 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Blaivas M, Theodoro D, Sierzenski PR (2003) Elevated intracranial pressure detected by bedside emergency ultrasonography of the optic nerve sheath. Acad Emerg Med 10:376–381.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1553-2712.2003.tb01352.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Gatsonis C, Paliwal P (2006) Meta-analysis of diagnostic and screening test accuracy evaluations: methodologic primer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 187:271–281.  https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.06.0226 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Koziarz A, Sne N, Kegel F et al (2017) Optic nerve sheath diameter sonography for the diagnosis of increased intracranial pressure: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol. BMJ Open 7:e016194.  https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016194 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Bürkner PC, Doebler P (2014) Testing for publication bias in diagnostic meta-analysis: a simulation study. Stat Med 33:3061–3077.  https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.6177 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Santori G (2016) Research papers: journals should drive data reproducibility. Nature 535:355.  https://doi.org/10.1038/535355b CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature and ESICM 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Anaesthesia and Intensive CareSan Martino Policlinico Hospital, IRCCS for OncologyGenoaItaly
  2. 2.Neurosciences Critical Care UnitAddenbrooke’s Hospital, University of CambridgeCambridgeUK
  3. 3.Department of Surgical Sciences and Integrated Diagnostics (DISC)University of GenoaGenoaItaly
  4. 4.Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Division of Neurosurgery, Brain Physics LaboratoryCambridge Biomedical Campus, Addenbrooke’s Hospital, University of CambridgeCambridgeUK
  5. 5.Institute of Electronic Systems, Warsaw University of TechnologyWarsawPoland
  6. 6.Anaesthesia and Intensive Care UnitE.O. Ospedali GallieraGenoaItaly
  7. 7.Department of Health Sciences (DISSAL)University of GenoaGenoaItaly
  8. 8.Paediatric Neurosurgery Unit, Division of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Health SciencesRed Cross War Memorial Children’s Hospital, University of Cape TownCape TownSouth Africa
  9. 9.Department of Intensive CareClinique Universitaire de Bruxelles (CUB) ErasmeBrusselsBelgium
  10. 10.School of Medicine and SurgeryUniversity of Milan-BicoccaMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations