Scholarlink

Background/Objective <p>Intracranial multimodal monitoring (iMMM) use is expanding, yet inconsistent documentation of the implantation procedure prevents data comparability and accurate safety profiling. We aimed to establish implantation standards defining which variables require documentation and at what specificity.</p> Methods <p>We conducted a three-round modified Delphi (May–August 2025) with an international panel of 82 experts with hands-on implantation experience. We investigated items common to the foundational Neurocore-iMMM consensus to test agreement between panels. Thresholds: ≥ 75% strong agreement, 66–74% moderate, and &lt; 50% no consensus.</p> Results <p>Retention was 72% through all rounds. Of 120 items (47% participant-proposed), 57 achieved consensus. Agreed-upon standards include probe placement documentation specifying tissue type (perilesional or normal-appearing), approach (image-guided or standardized), and post-placement imaging verification (99%); complication reporting specifying misplacement (98%), postoperative hemorrhage with location (99%), and CNS infection with colonization distinguished from infection by CSF cell count and mandatory culture of withdrawn material (95%); adverse event subcategorization of accuracy drift into probe displacement, calibration loss, and signal instability (91%); and documentation of leveling reference for fluid-filled lines (78%), fixation device configuration (77%), and recalibration protocol (76%). On 25 of 29 items shared with the foundational consensus, the two independent panels reached concordant agreement.</p> Conclusions <p>Aligned with NIH Common Data Elements, these implantation standards specify documentation from anatomical targeting designation to adverse event subcategorization for cross-center comparison, providing the item-level foundation from which reporting criteria can be operationalized and an implementation-ready framework for multicenter neurocritical care databases and monitoring-guided therapy trials.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Implantation Standards for Intracranial Multimodal Monitoring (Neurocore-iMMM): An International Delphi Consensus

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月21日

查看全文
  • Sami Barrit,
  • Trinity Pate,
  • Maria A. Poca,
  • Allen Waziri,
  • P. David Adelson,
  • András Büki,
  • Antoine Devalckeneer,
  • Ramon Navarro,
  • John Kanter,
  • David O. Okonkwo,
  • Bart Depreitere,
  • Daniel Pinggera,
  • Jonathon J. Parker,
  • the Neurocore-iMMM Study Group,
  • Nicolas Engrand,
  • Salim El Hadwe,
  • Alfonso Lagares

摘要

Background/Objective

Intracranial multimodal monitoring (iMMM) use is expanding, yet inconsistent documentation of the implantation procedure prevents data comparability and accurate safety profiling. We aimed to establish implantation standards defining which variables require documentation and at what specificity.

Methods

We conducted a three-round modified Delphi (May–August 2025) with an international panel of 82 experts with hands-on implantation experience. We investigated items common to the foundational Neurocore-iMMM consensus to test agreement between panels. Thresholds: ≥ 75% strong agreement, 66–74% moderate, and < 50% no consensus.

Results

Retention was 72% through all rounds. Of 120 items (47% participant-proposed), 57 achieved consensus. Agreed-upon standards include probe placement documentation specifying tissue type (perilesional or normal-appearing), approach (image-guided or standardized), and post-placement imaging verification (99%); complication reporting specifying misplacement (98%), postoperative hemorrhage with location (99%), and CNS infection with colonization distinguished from infection by CSF cell count and mandatory culture of withdrawn material (95%); adverse event subcategorization of accuracy drift into probe displacement, calibration loss, and signal instability (91%); and documentation of leveling reference for fluid-filled lines (78%), fixation device configuration (77%), and recalibration protocol (76%). On 25 of 29 items shared with the foundational consensus, the two independent panels reached concordant agreement.

Conclusions

Aligned with NIH Common Data Elements, these implantation standards specify documentation from anatomical targeting designation to adverse event subcategorization for cross-center comparison, providing the item-level foundation from which reporting criteria can be operationalized and an implementation-ready framework for multicenter neurocritical care databases and monitoring-guided therapy trials.