Neurologist Versus Machine: Is the Pupillometer Better than the Naked Eye in Detecting Pupillary Reactivity

Christopher L. Kramer, Alejandro A. Rabinstein, Eelco F.M. Wijdicks, Sara E. Hocker

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

16 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: A 62-year-old man with severe traumatic brain injury developed postsurgical anisocoria in which there was a discrepancy between pupillometer and manual testing.

Methods: Case report.

Results: The patient’s larger pupil was read as unreactive by the pupillometer but constricted 1 mm over 7–9 s of continuous light stimulation.

Conclusions: While pupillometry assessment is a valuable adjunct to the manual pupillary assessment, this case demonstrates that nonreactive pupils read on the pupillometer should be confirmed with the manual examination because it can miss very slowly reacting pupils.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)309-311
Number of pages3
JournalNeurocritical care
Volume21
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2014

Keywords

  • Brain death
  • Neurocritical care
  • Neurological examination
  • Pupillary reactivity
  • Pupillometer
  • Uncal herniation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology
  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Neurologist Versus Machine: Is the Pupillometer Better than the Naked Eye in Detecting Pupillary Reactivity'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this