8.4% sodium bicarbonate v 5% sodium chloride for raised ICP

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    8.4% sodium bicarbonate v 5% sodium chloride for raised intracranial pressure - a randomised controlled trial.

  • IRAS ID

    16825

  • Contact name

    Julian Brown

  • Sponsor organisation

    North Bristol NHS Trust Research and Development Office

  • Eudract number

    2009-012199-29

  • ISRCTN Number

    0000000000000

  • Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier

    0000000000000

  • Research summary

    After serious head injuries there may be swelling of the brain which may cause raised pressure within the skull. This is known as intracranial hypertension. Intracranial hypertension may cause further damage to the brain by reducing the supply of oxygen to the brain cells. Research has shown that controlling the intracranial pressure (ICP) can result in improved recovery of brain function in some survivors of significant head injuries. Monitoring of intracranial pressure is standard in patients with serious head injuries and when ICP rises there are a number of treatments that may be given to reduce to pressure to more safe levels. One of these treatments is to give some strong salt solution (hypertonic 5% sodium chloride) in to the veins. This helps reduce brain swelling and thus reduces intracranial pressure. One of the side effects of large amounts of sodium chloride is that it can make the blood acidic. This may cause other problems, including an increase in brain blood flow and an increase in intracranial pressure. Other forms of strong sodium solutions exist, including hypertonic 8.4% sodium bicarbonate. Hypertonic sodium bicarbonate is expected not to cause the blood to become acidic.This aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of 8.4% sodium bicarbonate at reducing intracranial pressure compared with the standard treatment with 5 % sodium chloride.The research is completed and results published

  • REC name

    Wales REC 3

  • REC reference

    09/MRE09/34

  • Date of REC Opinion

    20 Jul 2009

  • REC opinion

    Further Information Favourable Opinion