New consensus statements target controversial trial results on intracranial pressure monitoring in severe traumatic brain injury

New Rochelle, NY, October 15, 2015--Seven consensus statements developed by 23 international opinion leaders in the acute care of patients with severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) provide a clear interpretation of clinical trial results that compared intracranial pressure (ICP)-based management to a treatment protocol guided by CT-imaging and examination without ICP monitoring. Results of the BEST TRIP trial led to ongoing debate over the value of ICP monitoring in sTBI. These new consensus statements, which will help guide practicing physicians and researchers, are published in Journal of Neurotrauma, a peer-reviewed journal from Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers. The article is available free on the Journal of Neurotrauma website until November 15, 2015.

In "A Consensus-Based Interpretation of the Benchmark Evidence from South American Trials: Treatment of Intracranial Pressure Trial," Randall Chesnut, MD, University of Washington, Seattle, and an international team of researchers present their consensus opinions on the Benchmark Evidence from South American Trials: Treatment of Intracranial Pressure (BEST TRIP). The seven consensus statements that emerged from their discussions help clarify the trial protocols, the different patient outcomes with and without ICP monitoring, the validity of the trial, and the main implications of the trial results.

"This brief but eloquent consensus report helps revisit the overall implications and interpretations derived from the BEST TRIP trial," says John T. Povlishock, PhD, Editor-in-Chief of Journal of Neurotrauma and Professor, Medical College of Virginia Campus of Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond. "As noted by the authors, this consensus document reframes many of the controversial issues generated in this initial trial, calling for a more critical evaluation of the study and its overall interpretation. From my perspective as Editor-in-Chief, I believe the consensus positions detailed therein help place this trial in the appropriate intellectual framework, while highlighting the continued need for more rigorous evaluation of intracranial hypertension, its monitoring, and its implications for traumatically brain-injured patients."

###

About the Journal

Journal of Neurotrauma is an authoritative peer-reviewed journal published 24 times per year online with open access options and in print that focuses on the latest advances in the clinical and laboratory investigation of traumatic brain and spinal cord injury. Emphasis is on the basic pathobiology of injury to the nervous system, and the papers and reviews evaluate preclinical and clinical trials targeted at improving the early management and long-term care and recovery of patients with traumatic brain injury. Journal of Neurotrauma is the official journal of the National Neurotrauma Society and the International Neurotrauma Society. Complete tables of content and a sample issue may be viewed on the Journal of Neurotrauma website.

About the Publisher

Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers is a privately held, fully integrated media company known for establishing authoritative peer-reviewed journals in promising areas of science and biomedical research, including Therapeutic Hypothermia and Temperature Management, Tissue Engineering, and Brain Connectivity. Its biotechnology trade magazine, Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News (GEN), was the first in its field and is today the industry's most widely read publication worldwide. A complete list of the firm's 80 journals, books, and newsmagazines is available on the Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers) website.

---

---