评估创伤性脑损伤的结果:赫尔辛基评分与格拉斯哥昏迷量表。

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery Pub Date : 2024-07-25 DOI:10.1007/s00068-024-02604-w
Fares Komboz, Hiba Douja Chehade, Bilal Al Saffar, Dorothee Mielke, Veit Rohde, Tammam Abboud
{"title":"评估创伤性脑损伤的结果:赫尔辛基评分与格拉斯哥昏迷量表。","authors":"Fares Komboz, Hiba Douja Chehade, Bilal Al Saffar, Dorothee Mielke, Veit Rohde, Tammam Abboud","doi":"10.1007/s00068-024-02604-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The precision of assessment and prognosis in traumatic brain injury (TBI) is paramount for effective triage and informed therapeutic strategies. While the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) remains the cornerstone for TBI evaluation, it overlooks critical primary imaging findings. The Helsinki Score (HS), a novel tool designed to incorporate radiological data, offers a promising approach to predicting TBI outcomes. This study aims to evaluate the prognostic efficacy of HS in comparison to GCS across a substantial TBI patient cohort.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study encompassed TBI patients treated at our institution between 2008 and 2019, specifically those with an admission GCS of 14 or lower. We assessed both the initial GCS and the HS derived from primary CT scans. Key outcome metrics included the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) and mortality rates at hospital discharge and at 6 and 12-month intervals post-discharge. Predictive performances of GCS and HS were analyzed through Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves and Kendall tau-b correlation coefficients against each outcome.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 544 patients, with an average age of 62.2 ± 21.5 years, median initial GCS of 14, and a median HS of 3. The mortality rate at discharge stood at 8.6%, with a median GOS of 4. Both GCS and HS demonstrated significant correlations with mortality and GOS outcomes (p < 0.05). Notably, HS showed a markedly superior correlation with mortality (τb = 0.36) compared to GCS (τb = -0.11) and with GOS outcomes (τb = -0.40 for HS vs. τb = 0.33 for GCS). ROC analyses affirmed HS's enhanced predictive accuracy over GCS for both mortality (AUC of 0.79 for HS vs. 0.62 for GCS) and overall outcomes (AUC of 0.77 for HS vs. 0.71 for GCS).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings validate the HS in a large German cohort and suggest that radiological assessments alone, as exemplified by HS, can surpass the traditional GCS in predicting TBI outcomes. However, the HS, despite its efficacy, lacks the integration of clinical evaluation, a vital component in TBI management. This underscores the necessity for a holistic approach that amalgamates both radiological and clinical insights for a more comprehensive and accurate prognostication in TBI care.</p>","PeriodicalId":12064,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing outcomes in traumatic brain injury: Helsinki score versus Glasgow coma scale.\",\"authors\":\"Fares Komboz, Hiba Douja Chehade, Bilal Al Saffar, Dorothee Mielke, Veit Rohde, Tammam Abboud\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00068-024-02604-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The precision of assessment and prognosis in traumatic brain injury (TBI) is paramount for effective triage and informed therapeutic strategies. While the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) remains the cornerstone for TBI evaluation, it overlooks critical primary imaging findings. The Helsinki Score (HS), a novel tool designed to incorporate radiological data, offers a promising approach to predicting TBI outcomes. This study aims to evaluate the prognostic efficacy of HS in comparison to GCS across a substantial TBI patient cohort.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study encompassed TBI patients treated at our institution between 2008 and 2019, specifically those with an admission GCS of 14 or lower. We assessed both the initial GCS and the HS derived from primary CT scans. Key outcome metrics included the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) and mortality rates at hospital discharge and at 6 and 12-month intervals post-discharge. Predictive performances of GCS and HS were analyzed through Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves and Kendall tau-b correlation coefficients against each outcome.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 544 patients, with an average age of 62.2 ± 21.5 years, median initial GCS of 14, and a median HS of 3. The mortality rate at discharge stood at 8.6%, with a median GOS of 4. Both GCS and HS demonstrated significant correlations with mortality and GOS outcomes (p < 0.05). Notably, HS showed a markedly superior correlation with mortality (τb = 0.36) compared to GCS (τb = -0.11) and with GOS outcomes (τb = -0.40 for HS vs. τb = 0.33 for GCS). ROC analyses affirmed HS's enhanced predictive accuracy over GCS for both mortality (AUC of 0.79 for HS vs. 0.62 for GCS) and overall outcomes (AUC of 0.77 for HS vs. 0.71 for GCS).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings validate the HS in a large German cohort and suggest that radiological assessments alone, as exemplified by HS, can surpass the traditional GCS in predicting TBI outcomes. However, the HS, despite its efficacy, lacks the integration of clinical evaluation, a vital component in TBI management. This underscores the necessity for a holistic approach that amalgamates both radiological and clinical insights for a more comprehensive and accurate prognostication in TBI care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12064,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-024-02604-w\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-024-02604-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:创伤性脑损伤(TBI)的精确评估和预后对有效分流和知情治疗策略至关重要。虽然格拉斯哥昏迷量表(GCS)仍是评估创伤性脑损伤的基石,但它忽略了关键的主要影像学检查结果。赫尔辛基评分(HS)是一种结合放射学数据设计的新型工具,为预测创伤性脑损伤的预后提供了一种很有前景的方法。本研究旨在评估 HS 与 GCS 相比在大量 TBI 患者群中的预后效果:这项回顾性研究涵盖了 2008 年至 2019 年期间在我院接受治疗的 TBI 患者,特别是入院 GCS 为 14 或更低的患者。我们评估了初始 GCS 和主要 CT 扫描得出的 HS。主要结果指标包括格拉斯哥结果量表(GOS)和出院时以及出院后 6 个月和 12 个月的死亡率。通过接收者操作特征曲线(ROC)和 Kendall tau-b 相关系数分析了 GCS 和 HS 对每种结果的预测性能:研究纳入了 544 名患者,平均年龄为 62.2 ± 21.5 岁,初始 GCS 中位数为 14,HS 中位数为 3。出院时死亡率为 8.6%,GOS 中位数为 4:这些研究结果验证了德国大型队列中的 HS,并表明在预测创伤性脑损伤的预后方面,以 HS 为代表的单独放射学评估可以超越传统的 GCS。然而,HS 尽管有效,但缺乏临床评估的整合,而临床评估是 TBI 管理的重要组成部分。这突出表明,有必要采用一种综合方法,将放射学和临床见解结合起来,以便在创伤性脑损伤治疗中更全面、更准确地预测预后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Assessing outcomes in traumatic brain injury: Helsinki score versus Glasgow coma scale.

Background: The precision of assessment and prognosis in traumatic brain injury (TBI) is paramount for effective triage and informed therapeutic strategies. While the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) remains the cornerstone for TBI evaluation, it overlooks critical primary imaging findings. The Helsinki Score (HS), a novel tool designed to incorporate radiological data, offers a promising approach to predicting TBI outcomes. This study aims to evaluate the prognostic efficacy of HS in comparison to GCS across a substantial TBI patient cohort.

Methods: This retrospective study encompassed TBI patients treated at our institution between 2008 and 2019, specifically those with an admission GCS of 14 or lower. We assessed both the initial GCS and the HS derived from primary CT scans. Key outcome metrics included the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) and mortality rates at hospital discharge and at 6 and 12-month intervals post-discharge. Predictive performances of GCS and HS were analyzed through Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves and Kendall tau-b correlation coefficients against each outcome.

Results: The study included 544 patients, with an average age of 62.2 ± 21.5 years, median initial GCS of 14, and a median HS of 3. The mortality rate at discharge stood at 8.6%, with a median GOS of 4. Both GCS and HS demonstrated significant correlations with mortality and GOS outcomes (p < 0.05). Notably, HS showed a markedly superior correlation with mortality (τb = 0.36) compared to GCS (τb = -0.11) and with GOS outcomes (τb = -0.40 for HS vs. τb = 0.33 for GCS). ROC analyses affirmed HS's enhanced predictive accuracy over GCS for both mortality (AUC of 0.79 for HS vs. 0.62 for GCS) and overall outcomes (AUC of 0.77 for HS vs. 0.71 for GCS).

Conclusion: The findings validate the HS in a large German cohort and suggest that radiological assessments alone, as exemplified by HS, can surpass the traditional GCS in predicting TBI outcomes. However, the HS, despite its efficacy, lacks the integration of clinical evaluation, a vital component in TBI management. This underscores the necessity for a holistic approach that amalgamates both radiological and clinical insights for a more comprehensive and accurate prognostication in TBI care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
311
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery aims to open an interdisciplinary forum that allows for the scientific exchange between basic and clinical science related to pathophysiology, diagnostics and treatment of traumatized patients. The journal covers all aspects of clinical management, operative treatment and related research of traumatic injuries. Clinical and experimental papers on issues relevant for the improvement of trauma care are published. Reviews, original articles, short communications and letters allow the appropriate presentation of major and minor topics.
期刊最新文献
Non-operative treatment of metacarpal fractures and patient-reported outcomes: a multicentre snapshot study. Focus on challenges and advances in the treatment of traumatic brain injury. Publisher Correction: How does damage control strategy influence organ's suitability for donation after major trauma? A multi-institutional study. TBI related death has become the new epidemic in polytrauma: a 10-year prospective cohort analysis in severely injured patients Angioembolization in patients with blunt splenic trauma in Germany –guidelines vs. Reality a retrospective registry-based cohort study of the TraumaRegister DGU®
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1