创伤性脑损伤中 GCS-瞳孔量表的验证:前瞻性观察队列 CENTER-TBI 和 TRACK-TBI 中瞳孔反应性与 GCS 的增量预后价值。

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Journal of neurotrauma Pub Date : 2024-12-17 DOI:10.1089/neu.2024.0458
Rick J G Vreeburg, Florian D van Leeuwen, Geoffrey T Manley, John K Yue, Paul M Brennan, Xiaoying Sun, Sonia Jain, Thomas A van Essen, Wilco C Peul, Andrew I R Maas, David K Menon, Ewout W Steyerberg
{"title":"创伤性脑损伤中 GCS-瞳孔量表的验证:前瞻性观察队列 CENTER-TBI 和 TRACK-TBI 中瞳孔反应性与 GCS 的增量预后价值。","authors":"Rick J G Vreeburg, Florian D van Leeuwen, Geoffrey T Manley, John K Yue, Paul M Brennan, Xiaoying Sun, Sonia Jain, Thomas A van Essen, Wilco C Peul, Andrew I R Maas, David K Menon, Ewout W Steyerberg","doi":"10.1089/neu.2024.0458","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To compare the incremental prognostic value of pupillary reactivity captured as part of the Glasgow Coma Scale-Pupils (GCS-P) score or added as separate variable to the GCS+P, in traumatic brain injury (TBI). We analyzed patients enrolled between 2014 and 2018 in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI, <i>n</i> = 3521) and the Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury (TRACK-TBI, <i>n</i> = 1439) cohorts. Logistic regression was utilized to quantify the prognostic performances of GCS-P (GCS minus number of unreactive pupils) and GCS+P versus GCS alone according to Nagelkerke's <i>R</i><sup>2</sup>. End-points were mortality and unfavorable outcome (Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended score 1-4) at 6 month post-injury. We estimated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) with bootstrap resampling to summarize the improvement in prognostic capability. In a meta-analysis of CENTER-TBI and TRACK-TBI, GCS as a linear score had a <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> of 25% (95% CI 19-31%) for mortality and 33% (4-41%) for unfavorable outcome. Pupillary reactivity as a separate variable improved the <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> by an absolute value of 6% (4.0-7.7%) and 2% (1.2-3.0%) for mortality and unfavorable outcome, respectively, while comparatively half of this improvement was captured by the GCS-P score (3% [2.1-3.3%], 1% [1-1.7%], respectively). GCS-P showed a stronger association with 6-month outcome after TBI than GCS alone and provides a single integrated score. However, this comes at a loss of clinical and prognostic information compared with GCS+P. For prognostic models, inclusion of GCS and pupillary reactivity as separate factors may be preferable to using a GCS-P summary score.</p>","PeriodicalId":16512,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurotrauma","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of the GCS-Pupil Scale in Traumatic Brain Injury: Incremental Prognostic Value of Pupillary Reactivity with GCS in the Prospective Observational Cohorts CENTER-TBI and TRACK-TBI.\",\"authors\":\"Rick J G Vreeburg, Florian D van Leeuwen, Geoffrey T Manley, John K Yue, Paul M Brennan, Xiaoying Sun, Sonia Jain, Thomas A van Essen, Wilco C Peul, Andrew I R Maas, David K Menon, Ewout W Steyerberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/neu.2024.0458\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>To compare the incremental prognostic value of pupillary reactivity captured as part of the Glasgow Coma Scale-Pupils (GCS-P) score or added as separate variable to the GCS+P, in traumatic brain injury (TBI). We analyzed patients enrolled between 2014 and 2018 in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI, <i>n</i> = 3521) and the Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury (TRACK-TBI, <i>n</i> = 1439) cohorts. Logistic regression was utilized to quantify the prognostic performances of GCS-P (GCS minus number of unreactive pupils) and GCS+P versus GCS alone according to Nagelkerke's <i>R</i><sup>2</sup>. End-points were mortality and unfavorable outcome (Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended score 1-4) at 6 month post-injury. We estimated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) with bootstrap resampling to summarize the improvement in prognostic capability. In a meta-analysis of CENTER-TBI and TRACK-TBI, GCS as a linear score had a <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> of 25% (95% CI 19-31%) for mortality and 33% (4-41%) for unfavorable outcome. Pupillary reactivity as a separate variable improved the <i>R</i><sup>2</sup> by an absolute value of 6% (4.0-7.7%) and 2% (1.2-3.0%) for mortality and unfavorable outcome, respectively, while comparatively half of this improvement was captured by the GCS-P score (3% [2.1-3.3%], 1% [1-1.7%], respectively). GCS-P showed a stronger association with 6-month outcome after TBI than GCS alone and provides a single integrated score. However, this comes at a loss of clinical and prognostic information compared with GCS+P. For prognostic models, inclusion of GCS and pupillary reactivity as separate factors may be preferable to using a GCS-P summary score.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16512,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of neurotrauma\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of neurotrauma\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2024.0458\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of neurotrauma","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2024.0458","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

比较外伤性脑损伤(TBI)中瞳孔反应性作为格拉斯哥昏迷量表-瞳孔(GCS-P)评分的一部分或作为单独变量添加到GCS+P中的增量预后价值。我们分析了2014年至2018年在欧洲创伤性脑损伤神经创伤有效性合作研究(CENTER-TBI, n = 3521)和创伤性脑损伤转化研究和临床知识(TRACK-TBI, n = 1439)队列中登记的患者。根据Nagelkerke的R2,采用Logistic回归量化GCS-P (GCS减去无反应瞳孔数)和GCS+P与单独GCS的预后表现。终点是损伤后6个月的死亡率和不良结局(格拉斯哥结局量表扩展评分1-4)。我们用自举重采样估计95%置信区间(ci)来总结预后能力的改善。在CENTER-TBI和TRACK-TBI的荟萃分析中,GCS作为线性评分对于死亡率的R2为25% (95% CI 19-31%),对于不良结局的R2为33%(4-41%)。瞳孔反应性作为一个单独的变量,死亡率和不良结局的R2分别提高了6%(4.0-7.7%)和2%(1.2-3.0%)的绝对值,而这种改善的一半被GCS-P评分所捕获(分别为3%[2.1-3.3%]和1%[1-1.7%])。GCS- p与TBI后6个月预后的相关性比单独GCS强,并提供单一综合评分。然而,与GCS+P相比,这是在缺乏临床和预后信息的情况下进行的。对于预后模型,将GCS和瞳孔反应性作为单独的因素可能比使用GCS- p综合评分更可取。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Validation of the GCS-Pupil Scale in Traumatic Brain Injury: Incremental Prognostic Value of Pupillary Reactivity with GCS in the Prospective Observational Cohorts CENTER-TBI and TRACK-TBI.

To compare the incremental prognostic value of pupillary reactivity captured as part of the Glasgow Coma Scale-Pupils (GCS-P) score or added as separate variable to the GCS+P, in traumatic brain injury (TBI). We analyzed patients enrolled between 2014 and 2018 in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI, n = 3521) and the Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury (TRACK-TBI, n = 1439) cohorts. Logistic regression was utilized to quantify the prognostic performances of GCS-P (GCS minus number of unreactive pupils) and GCS+P versus GCS alone according to Nagelkerke's R2. End-points were mortality and unfavorable outcome (Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended score 1-4) at 6 month post-injury. We estimated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) with bootstrap resampling to summarize the improvement in prognostic capability. In a meta-analysis of CENTER-TBI and TRACK-TBI, GCS as a linear score had a R2 of 25% (95% CI 19-31%) for mortality and 33% (4-41%) for unfavorable outcome. Pupillary reactivity as a separate variable improved the R2 by an absolute value of 6% (4.0-7.7%) and 2% (1.2-3.0%) for mortality and unfavorable outcome, respectively, while comparatively half of this improvement was captured by the GCS-P score (3% [2.1-3.3%], 1% [1-1.7%], respectively). GCS-P showed a stronger association with 6-month outcome after TBI than GCS alone and provides a single integrated score. However, this comes at a loss of clinical and prognostic information compared with GCS+P. For prognostic models, inclusion of GCS and pupillary reactivity as separate factors may be preferable to using a GCS-P summary score.

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
Journal of neurotrauma
Journal of neurotrauma 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
7.10%
发文量
233
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Neurotrauma is the flagship, peer-reviewed publication for reporting on the latest advances in both the clinical and laboratory investigation of traumatic brain and spinal cord injury. The Journal focuses on the basic pathobiology of injury to the central nervous system, while considering preclinical and clinical trials targeted at improving both the early management and long-term care and recovery of traumatically injured patients. This is the essential journal publishing cutting-edge basic and translational research in traumatically injured human and animal studies, with emphasis on neurodegenerative disease research linked to CNS trauma.
期刊最新文献
Three-Dimensional Design and Implementation of a Dual Compartment Imaging Chamber to Assess Effects of Hypertonic Saline on Periaxonal Swelling and Axonal Spheroid Formation Following Cervical Contusive Spinal Cord Injury in Real Time. Re-Examining the Brain Injury Guidelines in Pediatric Traumatic Brain Injury: Can Simple Isolated Non-Displaced Skull Fractures be Treated as a BIG-1 Injury? Investigating the Neuropsychiatric Sequelae of Traumatic Brain Injury with Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology. Absence of the Neurogenic Response to a Repeated Concussive-Like Injury and Associated Deficits in Strategy Flexibility. Acute Opioid Administration Undermines Recovery after SCI: Adverse Effects Are Not Restricted to Morphine.
×
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