RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Various prediction scores have been developed to predict mortality in trauma patients, such as the shock index (SI), modified SI (mSI), age-adjusted SI (aSI), and the shock index (SI) multiplied by the alert/verbal/painful/unresponsive (AVPU) score (SIAVPU). The SIAVPU is a novel scoring system but its prediction accuracy for trauma outcomes remains in need of further validation. Therefore, we investigated the accuracy of four scoring systems, including SI, mSI, aSI, and SIAVPU, in predicting mortality, admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), and prolonged hospital length of stay ≥ 30 days (LOS). METHODS: This retrospective multicenter study used data from the Tzu Chi Hospital trauma database. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was determined for each outcome to assess their discrimination capabilities and comparing by Delong's test. Subgroup analyses were conducted to investigate the prediction accuracy of the SIAVPU in different patient populations. RESULTS: In total, 5355 patients were included in the analysis. The median of SIAVPU were significantly higher among patients at those with major injury (1.47 vs 0.63), those admitted to the ICU (0.73 vs 0.62), those with prolonged hospital LOS≥ 30 days (0.83 vs 0.64), and those with mortality (1.08 vs 0.64). The AUROC of the SIAVPU was significantly higher than that of the SI, mSI, and aSI for 24-h mortality (AUROC: 0.845 vs 0.533, 0.540, and 0.678), 3-day mortality (AUROC: 0.803 vs 0.513, 0.524, and 0.688), 7-day mortality (AUROC: 0.755 vs 0.494, 0.505, and 0.648), in-hospital mortality (AUROC: 0.722 vs 0.510, 0.524, and 0.667), ICU admission (AUROC: 0.635 vs 0.547, 0.551, and 0.563). At the optimal cutoff value of 0.9, the SIAVPU had an accuracy of 82.2% for predicting 24-h mortality, 82.8% for predicting 3-day mortality, of 82.8% for predicting 7-day mortality, of 82.5% for predicting in-hospital mortality, of 73.9% for predicting Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission, and of 81.7% for predicting prolonged hospital LOS ≥30 days. CONCLUSIONS: Our results reveal that SIAVPU has better accuracy than the SI, mSI, and aSI for predicting 24-h, 3-day, 7-day, and in-hospital mortality; ICU admission; and prolonged hospital LOS ≥30 days among patients with traumatic injury.
Asunto(s)
Heridas y Lesiones , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Masculino , Femenino , Heridas y Lesiones/mortalidad , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto , Servicios Médicos de Urgencia , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Anciano , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Choque/mortalidad , Curva ROC , Puntaje de Gravedad del Traumatismo , Mortalidad HospitalariaRESUMEN
Background and Objectives: In the context of prehospital care, spinal immobilization is commonly employed to maintain cervical stability in head and neck injury patients. However, its use in cases of unclear consciousness or major trauma patients is often precautionary, pending the exclusion of unstable spinal injuries through appropriate diagnostic imaging. The impact of prehospital C-spinal immobilization in these specific patient populations remains uncertain. Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study at Taipei Tzu Chi Hospital from January 2009 to May 2019, focusing on trauma patients suspected of head and neck injuries. The primary outcome assessed was in-hospital mortality. We employed multivariable logistic regression to investigate the relationship between prehospital C-spine immobilization and outcomes, while adjusting for various factors such as age, gender, type of traumatic brain injury, Injury Severity Score (ISS), Revised Trauma Score (RTS), and activation of trauma team. Results: Our analysis encompassed 2733 patients. Among these, patients in the unclear consciousness group (GCS ≤ 8) who underwent C-spine immobilization exhibited a higher mortality rate than those without immobilization. However, there was no statistically significant difference in mortality among patients with alert consciousness (GCS > 8). Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that advanced age (age ≥ 65), unclear consciousness (GCS ≤ 8), major traumatic injuries (ISS ≥ 16 and RTS ≤ 7), and the use of neck collars for immobilization (adjusted OR: 1.850, 95% CI: 1.240-2.760, p = 0.003) were significantly associated with an increased risk of mortality. Subgroup analysis indicated that C-spine immobilization was significantly linked to an elevated risk of mortality in older adults (age ≥ 65), patients with unclear consciousness (GCS ≤ 8), those with major traumatic injuries (ISS ≥ 16 and RTS ≤ 7), and individuals in shock (shock index > 1). Conclusions: While our findings do not advocate for the complete abandonment of neck collars in all suspected head and neck injury patients, our study suggests that prehospital cervical and spinal immobilization should be applied more selectively in certain head and neck injury populations. This approach is particularly relevant for older individuals (age ≥ 65), those with unclear consciousness (GCS ≤ 8), individuals experiencing major traumatic injuries (ISS ≥ 16 or RTS ≤ 7), and patients in a state of shock (shock index ≥ 1). Our study employs a retrospective cohort design, which may introduce selection bias. Therefore, in the future, there is a need for confirmation of our results through a two-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT) arises, as this design is considered ideal for addressing this issue.
Asunto(s)
Traumatismos del Cuello , Traumatismos Vertebrales , Humanos , Anciano , Traumatismos Vertebrales/terapia , Puntaje de Gravedad del Traumatismo , Estudios Retrospectivos , Traumatismos del Cuello/terapia , InmovilizaciónRESUMEN
ABSTRACT: Objectives: Many prehospital trauma triage scores have been proposed, but none has emerged as a criterion standard. Therefore, a rapid and accurate tool is necessary for field triage. The shock index (SI) multiplied by the AVPU (Alert, responds to Voice, responds to Pain, Unresponsive) score (SIAVPU) reflected the hemodynamic and neurological conditions through a combination of the SI and AVPU. This study aimed to investigate the prediction performance of SI multiplied by the AVPU and to compare the prediction performance of other prehospital trauma triage scores in a population with traumatic injury. Patients and Methods: This study included 6,156 patients with trauma injury from the Taipei Tzu Chi trauma database. We investigated the accuracy of four scoring systems in predicting mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and prolonged hospital stay (defined as a duration of hospitalization >14 days). In the subgroup analysis, we also analyzed the effects of age, injury mechanism and severity, underlying diseases, and traumatic brain injury. Results: The predictive accuracy of SIAVPU for mortality, ICU admission, and prolonged hospital stay was significantly higher than that of SI, modified SI, and SI multiplied by age in the traumatic injury population, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.738 for mortality, 0.641 for ICU admission, and 0.606 for prolonged hospital stay. In the subgroup analysis, the prediction accuracy of mortality, ICU admission, and prolonged hospital stay of SIAVPU was also better in patients with younger age, older age, major trauma (Injury Severity Score ≥16), motor vehicle collisions, fall injury, healthy, cardiovascular disease, mixed traumatic brain injury, and isolated traumatic brain injury. The best cutoff levels of SIAVPU score to predict mortality, ICU admission, and total length of stay ≥14 days in trauma injury patients were 0.90, 0.82, and 0.80, with accuracies of 88.56%, 79.84%, and 78.62%, respectively. Conclusions: In conclusion, SIAVPU is a rapid and accurate field triage score with better prediction accuracy for mortality, ICU admission, and prolonged hospital stay than SI, modified SI, and SI multiplied by age in patients with trauma. Patients with SIAVPU ≥0.9 should be considered for the highest-level trauma center available within the geographic constraints of regional trauma systems.
Asunto(s)
Lesiones Traumáticas del Encéfalo , Heridas y Lesiones , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Puntaje de Gravedad del Traumatismo , Centros Traumatológicos , Lesiones Traumáticas del Encéfalo/diagnóstico , Hospitalización , Heridas y Lesiones/diagnósticoAsunto(s)
Colesterol/metabolismo , Granuloma/etiología , Granuloma/patología , Traumatismos de los Tejidos Blandos/complicaciones , Accidentes de Tránsito , Biopsia con Aguja , Femenino , Granuloma/cirugía , Humanos , Inmunohistoquímica , Persona de Mediana Edad , Medición de Riesgo , Traumatismos de los Tejidos Blandos/patología , Muslo/lesiones , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Lumbar puncture is a commonly practiced bedside technique for acquiring cerebrospinal fluid for the purposes of examination, spinal anesthesia, and as therapeutic trial for normal pressure hydrocephalus. Headache and backache after lumbar puncture are not uncommon. We report an elderly woman who suffered from altered consciousness and acute neurologic deficit after a difficult lumbar puncture. Serial imaging studies revealed active bleeding from the left first lumbar artery with the formation of spinal epidural hematoma and coexisting acute cranial intraventricular hematoma and subarachnoid hemorrhage. Lumbar puncture may rarely associate with life-threatening complications. Acute spinal subdural hemorrhage or subarachnoid hemorrhage after lumbar puncture is a timely diagnosis and needs urgent interventions. Clinicians should be aware of these rare but life-threatening complications after lumbar puncture. A cranial unenhanced CT is mandatory for patients having acute altered consciousness after lumbar puncture. A thorough vascular imaging evaluation from the lumbar spine to the brain is warranted in selected cases.