Intracranial pressure-flow relationships in traumatic brain injury patients expose gaps in the tenets of models and pressure-oriented management.

Background: The protocols and therapeutic guidance established for treating traumatic brain injuries (TBI) in neurointensive care focus on managing cerebral blood flow (CBF) and brain tissue oxygenation based on pressure signals. The decision support process relies on assumed relationships between cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) and blood flow, pressure-flow relationships (PFRs), and shares this framework of assumptions with mathematical intracranial hemodynamic models. These foundational assumptions are difficult to verify, and their violation can impact clinical decision-making and model validity. Method: A hypothesis- and model-driven method for verifying and understanding the foundational intracranial hemodynamic PFRs is developed and applied to a novel multi-modality monitoring dataset. Results: Model analysis of joint observations of CPP and CBF validates the standard PFR when autoregulatory processes are impaired as well as unmodelable cases dominated by autoregulation. However, it also identifies a dynamical regime -or behavior pattern- where the PFR assumptions are wrong in a precise, data-inferable way due to negative CPP-CBF coordination over long timescales. This regime is of both clinical and research interest: its dynamics are modelable under modified assumptions while its causal direction and mechanistic pathway remain unclear. Conclusions: Motivated by the understanding of mathematical physiology, the validity of the standard PFR can be assessed