- Letter to the Editor
- Open Access
Transcranial Doppler ultrasound in the ICU: it is not all sunshine and rainbows
Critical Ultrasound Journal volume 10, Article number: 2 (2018)
We read the article about Transcranial Doppler (TCD) for intensivists . Although not a novel ultrasound technique, in particular the “blind” o non-imaging TCD (bTCD), authors´ efforts to promote some basic applications of the Duplex technique (transcranial color-coded duplex sonography, TCCS) are remarkable.
However, some technical points and assertions are dubious and/or incorrect, as noted below:
In the first place, regarding the midline shift (MLS) measurement technique by TCCS, (A-B)/2 is well-studied and validated against CT . While proposed by authors’ as an “internal standard” , as shown in Fig. 1 of the original article , measuring the distance to the contralateral cranial bone is not described in the original technique, it is unnecessary and adds complexity; thus, it should not be taken into account, as is the case with the mentioned “C and D” technique. To the authors´ knowledge, whether methodologically correct or not, there are no study validating either of them. Practitioners should be aware that the MLS measurement by TCCS is not reliable in the presence of bone defects (like decompressive craniectomy or skull fractures), temporal cephalohematoma, or changes in intracranial anatomy secondary to trauma , citing the most common examples observed in daily practice. Particularly in patients with a decompressive craniectomy, an alternative MLS measurement technique is well validated against CT .
Second, when moving from a bTCD technique to the Duplex technique, practitioners must be aware of the “mean velocities” recorded by the ultrasound machine: time-averaged maximum velocity, known as TAMAX or TAP and time-averaged mean velocity, also known as TAMEAN or TAMV. While both are “mean” velocities, TAMEAN is approximately half the TAMAX . Since in TCCS, the velocity considered is the TAMAX , using TAMEAN instead of TAP leads to underestimating velocities. This is clearly evidenced in Fig. 2 , where in the TCCS image, TAP is correctly used, but in the transcervical insonation, TAMV is used instead of TAP. Indeed, TAP should be compared when the Lindegaard Index (LI) is used, but comparing TAMAX/TAMEAN as is performed in Fig. 2 is an obvious mistake and readers need to be cautioned from making the same error. The actual LI in this case is 2.1, which indicates hyperemia (Fig. 1). According to this now well-performed TCD ratio, the angiographic finding of vasospasm was fortuitous, at least if this index is used independently . In addition, transcervical insonation should be performed with the same phased-array probe to observe the “distal” extracranial internal carotid artery (ICA)—TAP (Fig. 2a) . It should be noted that this segment is not assessed with the linear probe as shown in Fig. 2c of the original article. In addition, large correction angles (60°) result when a linear transducer is used and this must be especially avoided when comparing middle cerebral artery (MCA)/ICA TAP. Thus, the Doppler correction angle should not be used . As noted, transcervical insonation should be a basic part of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS)-TCD, at least if vasospasm evaluation is considered.
Third, to the best of our knowledge, we are not aware of any guidelines that recommend TCD as a screening tool for further indication of an ancillary test to confirm the diagnosis of brain death. When determining the presence of cerebral circulatory arrest (CCA), many countries around the world accept this tool as an ancillary test to confirm the clinical diagnosis of brain death . For example, there are formal TCD guidelines in Latin-American addressing this issue [10, 11]. For this indication, accepted TCD-CCA criteria for both “anterior” and “posterior” cerebral arterial circulation must be registered [12, 13]. Thus, intuitively, the transtemporal window is not enough for this indication. As a point-of-care application, transforaminal window should also be considered a basic window, at least if a CCA application is proposed (Fig. 2b). Transorbital (Fig. 2c) and transcervical (Fig. 2a) are also useful (although not fully accepted) in some actual patients to determine CCA, in particular when intracranial arterial flows are not detected on first examination, due to inadequate bone insonation windows, for example (observed in at least 25% of the patients) . Regarding Doppler CCA criteria, the oscillating flow, although a biphasic flow, needs to be clearly differentiated from a high-resistance biphasic flow with a net forward flow (Fig. 3). In doubtful cases, always correlating with the clinical signs of brain death, modifications of the waveforms with interventions, such as osmotic therapy, may allow practitioners to discard the CCA diagnosis given the reversibility of the case on follow-up examinations.
Finally, velocities and indices (e.g., pulsatility index) are highly variable, resulting from physiologic (arousal, for example) to pathologic conditions (e.g., raising intracranial pressure) (Tables 1 and 2). Thus, caution should be exercised when interpreting TCD findings, which should always be considered within a multimodality monitoring, and not in isolation. The phrase “trends are your friend” is highly applicable when interpreting TCD velocities and indices.
In conclusion, POCUS TCD is not a perfect technique. Many aspects (technical and interpretative) should be considered to obtain a reliable TCD exam. In addition, for the reasons explained above, TCCS should not be limited to transtemporal windows, since transforaminal, transcervical, and transorbital windows have a defined role in basic TCD applications. The entire TCCS exam is performed with the same phased-array probe, based on the simplicity of POCUS, without the need of formal TCD examinations or dedicated machines, as happens with most (if not all) POCUS applications in the ICU. It is clear that a TCD-training curricula is mandatory to fulfill intensivists’ needs.
blind or non-imaging TCD
transcranial color-coded duplex sonography
time-averaged maximum velocity/time-averaged peak velocity
time-averaged mean velocity
cerebral circulatory arrest
Lau VI, Arntfield RT (2017) Point–of–care transcranial Doppler by intensivists. Crit Ultrasound J 9:21
Seidel G, Gerriets T, Kaps M, Missler U (1996) Dislocation of the third ventricle due to space-occupying stroke evaluated by transcranial duplex sonography. J Neuroimaging 6(4):227–230
Blanco P, Blaivas M (2017) Applications of transcranial color-coded sonography in the emergency department. J Ultrasound Med 36(6):1251–1266
Caricato A, Mignani V, Bocci MG, Pennisi MA, Sandroni C, Tersali A, Antonaci A, de Waure C, Antonelli M (2012) Usefulness of transcranial echography in patients with decompressive craniectomy: a comparison with computed tomography scan. Crit Care Med 40(6):1745–1752
Blanco P (2015) Volumetric blood flow measurement using Doppler ultrasound: concerns about the technique. J Ultrasound 18(2):201–204
Gonzalez NR, Boscardin WJ, Glenn T, Vinuela F, Martin NA (2007) Vasospasm probability index: a combination of transcranial doppler velocities, cerebral blood flow, and clinical risk factors to predict cerebral vasospasm after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. J Neurosurg 107(6):1101–1112
Alexandrov AV, Sloan MA, Wong LK, Douville C, Razumovsky AY, Koroshetz WJ, Kaps M, Tegeler CH, American Society of Neuroimaging Practice Guidelines Committee (2007) Practice standards for transcranial Doppler ultrasound: part I—test performance. J Neuroimaging 17(1):11–18
ACR–AIUM–SPR–SRU. Practice parameter for the performance of a transcranial Doppler ultrasound examination for adults and children (Revised 2017). http://www.aium.org/resources/guidelines/transcranial.pdf. Accessed 10 Dec 2017
Citerio G, Crippa IA, Bronco A, Vargiolu A, Smith M (2014) Variability in brain death determination in Europe: looking for a solution. Neurocrit Care 21(3):376–382
Lange MC, Zétola VH, Miranda-Alves M, Moro CH, Silvado CE, Rodrigues DL, Gregorio EG, Silva GS, Oliveira-Filho J, Perdatella MT, Pontes-Neto OM, Fábio SR, Avelar WM, Freitas GR, Task Force Group of the Neurosonology Department, Braz Acad Neurol (2012) Brazilian guidelines for the application of transcranial ultrasound as a diagnostic test for the confirmation of brain death. Arq Neuropsiquiatr 70(5):373–380
Consensus Group on Transcranial Doppler in Diagnosis of Brain Death (2014) Latin American consensus on the use of transcranial Doppler in the diagnosis of brain death. Rev Bras Ter Intensiva 26(3):240–252
Ducrocq X, Hassler W, Moritake K, Newell DW, von Reutern GM, Shiogai T, Smith RR (1998) Consensus opinion on diagnosis of cerebral circulatory arrest using Doppler-sonography: Task Force Group on cerebral death of the Neurosonology Research Group of the World Federation of Neurology. J Neurol Sci 159(2):145–150
Naqvi J, Yap KH, Ahmad G, Ghosh J (2013) Transcranial Doppler ultrasound: a review of the physical principles and major applications in critical care. Int J Vasc Med 2013:629378
PB and AAC contributed equally to this work. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Authors would like to thank Mrs. Julieta Vigna for the language guidance.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Blanco, P., Abdo-Cuza, A. Transcranial Doppler ultrasound in the ICU: it is not all sunshine and rainbows. Crit Ultrasound J 10, 2 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13089-018-0085-4