Individualized mean arterial pressure targets in critically ill
patients guided by non-invasive cerebral-autoregulation: a scoping review
Critical Care volume 29,
Article number: 196 Published: 16 May 2025
Background
Current guidelines recommend a uniform mean arterial
pressure (MAP) target for resuscitating critically ill patients; for example,
65 mmHg for patients with sepsis and post-cardiac arrest. However, since
cerebral autoregulation capacity likely varies widely in patients, uniform
target may be insufficient in maintaining cerebral perfusion. Personalized MAP
targets, based on a non-invasive determination of cerebral autoregulation, may
optimize perfusion and reduce complications.
Objectives
This scoping review summarizes the numerical values,
feasibility, and clinical data on personalized MAP targets in critically ill
patients. The focus is on non-invasive monitoring, such as near-infrared
spectroscopy and transcranial doppler ultrasound, due to their safety,
practicality and applicability to patients with- and without brain injury.
Methods
Following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, a systematic search of Ovid
MedLine, Embase (Ovid), and the Cochrane Library (Wiley) was conducted on
September 28, 2023. Two independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and
full texts for eligibility and manually reviewed references.
Results
Of 7,738 studies were identified, 49 met the inclusion
criteria. Of these, 45 (92%) were observational and 4 (8%) were interventional.
Patient populations included cardiac surgery (26, 53%), non-cardiac major
surgery (4, 8%), cardiac arrest (8, 16%), brain injury (7, 14%), respiratory
failure and shock (3, 6%), and sepsis (3, 6%). Optimal MAP was reported in 24
(49%), lower limit of autoregulation in 23 (47%), and upper limit of
autoregulation in 10 studies (20%). Thirty-four studies reported partial data loss
due to software failures, anomalous data, insufficient natural MAP fluctuation,
and workflow barriers. Available randomized controlled trials (RCT) identified
challenges with maintaining patients within their target range. Studies
explored the associations between personalized MAP targets and a wide range of
neurological and non-neurological outcomes, with the most significant and
consistent associations identified for acute kidney injury and major morbidity
and mortality. Ten studies investigated demographic predictors identifying only
few predictors of personalized targets.
Conclusion
Preliminary investigations suggest considerable variability
in personalized MAP targets, which may explain differences in clinical outcomes
among critically ill populations. Key gaps remain, including a lack of
observational studies in critically ill subpopulations other than cardiac
surgery and well-designed RCTs. Resolving identified feasibility barriers might
be crucial to successfully carrying out future studies.