RESUMO
Accurate measurement of traumatic intracranial hematoma volume is important for assessing disease progression and prognosis, as well as serving as an important endpoint in clinical trials aimed at preventing hematoma expansion. While the ABC/2 formula has traditionally been used for volume estimation in spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage, its adaptation to traumatic hematomas lacks validation. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of ABC/2 with computer-assisted volumetric analysis (CAVA) in estimating the volumes of traumatic intracranial hematomas. We performed a dual-center observational study that included adult patients with moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury. Volumes of intracerebral (ICH), subdural (SDH), and epidural hematomas (EDH) from admission CT scans were measured using ABC/2 and CAVA, and compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, Spearman's rank correlation, Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), and Bland-Altman plots. Prognostic significance for outcomes were evaluated through logistic and linear regression models. In total, 1,179 patients with 1,543 hematomas were included. Despite a high correlation (Spearman coefficients between 0.95 and 0.98) and excellent concordance (Lin's CCC from 0.89 to 0.96) between ABC/2 and CAVA, ABC/2 overestimated hematoma volumes compared to CAVA, in some instances exceeding 50 ml. Bland-Altman analysis highlighted wide limits of agreement, especially in SDH. While both methods demonstrated comparable accuracy in predicting outcomes, CAVA was slightly better at predicting craniotomies and midline shift. We conclude that while ABC/2 provides a generally reliable volumetric assessment suitable for descriptive purposes and as baseline variables in studies, CAVA should be the gold standard in clinical situations and studies requiring more precise volume estimations, such as those using hematoma expansion as an outcome.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) has a global mortality rate of about 30%, resulting in acquired life-long disabilities in many survivors. To potentially improve outcomes in this TBI population, the management of secondary injuries, particularly the failure of cerebrovascular reactivity (assessed via the pressure reactivity index; PRx, a correlation between intracranial pressure (ICP) and mean arterial blood pressure (MAP)), has gained interest in the field. However, derivation of PRx requires high-resolution data and expensive technological solutions, as calculations use a short time-window, which has resulted in it being used in only a handful of centers worldwide. As a solution to this, low resolution (longer time-windows) PRx has been suggested, known as Long-PRx or LPRx. Though LPRx has been proposed little is known about the best methodology to derive this measure, with different thresholds and time-windows proposed. Furthermore, the impact of ICP monitoring on cerebrovascular reactivity measures is poorly understood. Hence, this observational study establishes critical thresholds of LPRx associated with long-term functional outcome, comparing different time-windows for calculating LPRx as well as evaluating LPRx determined through external ventricular drains (EVD) vs intraparenchymal pressure device (IPD) ICP monitoring. METHODS: The study included a total of n = 435 TBI patients from the Karolinska University Hospital. Patients were dichotomized into alive vs. dead and favorable vs. unfavorable outcomes based on 1-year Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS). Pearson's chi-square values were computed for incrementally increasing LPRx or ICP thresholds against outcome. The thresholds that generated the greatest chi-squared value for each LPRx or ICP parameter had the highest outcome discriminatory capacity. This methodology was also completed for the segmentation of the population based on EVD, IPD, and time of data recorded in hospital stay. RESULTS: LPRx calculated with 10-120-min windows behaved similarly, with maximal chi-square values ranging at around a LPRx of 0.25-0.35, for both survival and favorable outcome. When investigating the temporal relations of LPRx derived thresholds, the first 4 days appeared to be the most associated with outcomes. The segmentation of the data based on intracranial monitoring found limited differences between EVD and IPD, with similar LPRx values around 0.3. CONCLUSION: Our work suggests that the underlying prognostic factors causing impairment in cerebrovascular reactivity can, to some degree, be detected using lower resolution PRx metrics (similar found thresholding values) with LPRx found clinically using as low as 10 min-by-minute samples of MAP and ICP. Furthermore, EVD derived LPRx with intermittent cerebrospinal fluid draining, seems to present similar outcome capacity as IPD. This low-resolution low sample LPRx method appears to be an adequate substitute for the clinical prognostic value of PRx and may be implemented independent of ICP monitoring method when PRx is not feasible, though further research is warranted.