ICP Monitoring Linked to Lower 30-Day Mortality in Kenyan Severe TBI Patients

Intracranial Pressure Monitoring in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Clinical Perspective

Managing severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) is a critical challenge focused on preventing secondary brain injury, which often dictates patient mortality and long-term disability [1]. Intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring is a cornerstone of this effort in many high-resource settings, intended to guide therapies that mitigate cerebral edema and ischemia [2, 3]. However, its direct impact on survival has been debated, with some trials failing to show a clear mortality benefit [4, 5]. This uncertainty is magnified in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where questions of resource allocation and feasibility are paramount [6, 7]. Addressing this evidence gap, a recent 15-year retrospective study from a Kenyan tertiary center provides new data, finding that the implementation of ICP monitoring was independently associated with a significant reduction in 30-day mortality in patients with sTBI [8].

Study Design and Patient Cohort in a Kenyan Tertiary Center

The study sought to evaluate long-term trends in the management and outcomes of sTBI at a major Kenyan hospital, with a specific focus on the impact of invasive ICP monitoring on 30-day mortality. To do this, researchers conducted a retrospective quasi-experimental analysis of consecutive sTBI admissions between January 2010 and December 2024. The cohort included patients aged 13 years or older with a postresuscitation Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of 8 or less. The study period was strategically divided into two distinct periods to assess the effect of the new intervention: Era 1 (2010–2014), before ICP monitoring was available, and Era 2 (2015–2024), when it became a routine part of care. For each of the 126 patients included, investigators collected comprehensive data on demographics, injury severity (using the Injury Severity Score, pupillary response, and Marshall CT class, a system for grading head injury based on imaging findings), and key physiological parameters. The patient population was predominantly young and male, with a median age of 32 years and 80% being male. Of this group, 52 patients (41%) received ICP monitoring, with devices split between parenchymal monitors (56%) and external ventricular drains (44%).

Impact on 30-Day Mortality: Matched and Unmatched Analyses

An initial analysis of the entire cohort revealed a stark difference in outcomes. The 30-day mortality rate for patients who received ICP monitoring was 27%, compared to 54% for those who did not, yielding a risk ratio of 0.50 (p = 0.002). While this initial finding is notable, such a direct comparison can be misleading due to potential differences in the baseline severity of illness between the two groups. To address this, the researchers employed a more rigorous statistical method known as propensity score analysis. This technique creates a fairer comparison by matching patients on key prognostic factors, in effect simulating the balance of a randomized trial. In this study, 41 pairs of patients were matched 1:1 based on age, sex, Injury Severity Score, GCS score, pupillary response, hypotension, hypoxemia, time to admission, and Marshall CT class. In this carefully balanced analysis of 41 matched pairs, the mortality benefit persisted: the 30-day mortality rate was 29% with monitoring versus 51% without (risk ratio 0.57; odds ratio 0.39; p = 0.043). This result indicates that even after accounting for major confounding variables, ICP monitoring was independently associated with a lower risk of death.

Changes in Management Strategies and Complication Rates

The introduction of routine ICP monitoring in Era 2 coincided with a more aggressive, data-driven approach to sTBI management. The availability of real-time pressure readings appeared to empower clinicians to use targeted therapies more frequently. For example, the use of hypertonic saline to osmotically reduce intracranial pressure increased from 35% of patients in Era 1 to 62% in Era 2 (p = 0.003). Even more dramatically, cerebrospinal fluid drainage via an external ventricular drain, a direct method of pressure control, rose from 1.4% to 37% (p < 0.001). Surgical intervention also increased, with decompressive craniectomy utilization climbing from 2.4% to 22% (p = 0.011). These shifts suggest that monitoring did not just provide data but also enabled a more active and guideline-concordant treatment strategy. Importantly, the implementation of this invasive technology appeared safe in this setting. The reported rates of device-related complications were low, with both infection and hemorrhage occurring in just 7.7% of monitored patients, supporting the feasibility of the practice in a resource-limited environment.

Overall Trends and Clinical Implications

Over the 15-year study period, the Kenyan center experienced a rising number of sTBI admissions, reflecting a growing public health challenge. In parallel, however, the facility achieved a decline in early mortality, a trend the authors attribute to the phased adoption of ICP monitoring and associated protocol-based care. The study's central finding is that ICP monitoring was independently associated with lower 30-day mortality in this LMIC setting, even after rigorous statistical adjustment for baseline injury severity. This provides compelling evidence that the benefits of advanced neuromonitoring are not confined to high-income countries. For clinicians in similar environments, these findings support the argument for investing in guideline-concordant care, suggesting that the implementation of scalable, bundled interventions centered on ICP monitoring can lead to substantial improvements in survival for patients with severe traumatic brain injury.

References

1. Chang Y, Wong C, Hsu H, et al. Brain Tissue Oxygen Combined with Intracranial Pressure Monitoring in Patients with Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: An Updated Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis Following the OXY-TC Trial.. World neurosurgery. 2025. doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2025.123926

2. Zhang C, Zhou L, Zhang K, et al. Brain tissue oxygen pressure combined with intracranial pressure monitoring may improve clinical outcomes for patients with severe traumatic brain injury: a systemic review and meta-analysis.. PeerJ. 2024. doi:10.7717/peerj.18086

3. Hawryluk GWJ, Aguilera S, Büki A, et al. A management algorithm for patients with intracranial pressure monitoring: the Seattle International Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Consensus Conference (SIBICC). Intensive Care Medicine. 2019. doi:10.1007/s00134-019-05805-9

4. Chesnut RM, Temkin N, Carney N, et al. A Trial of Intracranial-Pressure Monitoring in Traumatic Brain Injury. New England Journal of Medicine. 2012. doi:10.1056/nejmoa1207363

5. Han J, Yang S, Zhang C, Zhao M, Li A. Impact of Intracranial Pressure Monitoring on Prognosis of Patients With Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A PRISMA Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.. Medicine. 2016. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000002827

6. Xue S, Zhang Z, Liu Y. Effects of intracranial pressure monitoring in pediatric severe traumatic brain injury: a meta-analysis of cohort studies.. Frontiers in neurology. 2025. doi:10.3389/fneur.2025.1557820

7. Cederberg D, Harrington BM, Vlok AJ, Siesjö P. Effect of antisecretory factor, given as a food supplement to adult patients with severe traumatic brain injury (SASAT): protocol for an exploratory randomized double blind placebo-controlled trial. Trials. 2022. doi:10.1186/s13063-022-06275-z

8. Ongas T, Chikophe I, Mavuti J, et al. Impact of intracranial pressure monitoring on 30-day mortality in severe traumatic brain injury: a retrospective cohort study in Kenya.. Journal of neurosurgery. 2026. doi:10.3171/2025.12.JNS251974