RESUMEN
PURPOSE: Identify patient subgroups with different functional outcomes after SCI and study the association between functional status and initial ISNCSCI components. METHODS: Using CART, we performed an observational cohort study on data from 675 patients enrolled in the Rick-Hansen Registry(RHSCIR) between 2014 and 2019. The outcome was the Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM) and predictors included AIS, NLI, UEMS, LEMS, pinprick(PPSS), and light touch(LTSS) scores. A temporal validation was performed on data from 62 patients treated between 2020 and 2021 in one of the RHSCIR participating centers. RESULTS: The final CART resulted in four subgroups with increasing totSCIM according to PPSS, LEMS, and UEMS: 1)PPSS < 27(totSCIM = 28.4 ± 16.3); 2)PPSS ≥ 27, LEMS < 1.5, UEMS < 45(totSCIM = 39.5 ± 19.0); 3)PPSS ≥ 27, LEMS < 1.5, UEMS ≥ 45(totSCIM = 57.4 ± 13.8); 4)PPSS ≥ 27, LEMS ≥ 1.5(totSCIM = 66.3 ± 21.7). The validation model performed similarly to the original model. The adjusted R-squared and F-test were respectively 0.556 and 62.2(P-value <0.001) in the development cohort and, 0.520 and 31.9(P-value <0.001) in the validation cohort. CONCLUSION: Acknowledging the presence of four characteristic subgroups of patients with distinct phenotypes of functional recovery based on PPSS, LEMS, and UEMS could be used by clinicians early after tSCI to plan rehabilitation and establish realistic goals. An improved sensory function could be key for potentiating motor gains, as a PPSS ≥ 27 was a predictor of a good function.
After a traumatic Spinal Cord Injury (SCI), early neurological examination using the International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (ISNCSCI) is recommended to determine initial injury severity and prognosis.This study identified three initial ISNCSCI components defining four subgroups of SCI patients with different expectations in functional outcomes, namely the initial pinprick sensory score, the Lower Extremity Motor Score, and the Upper Extremity Motor Score.Clinicians could use these subgroups early after tSCI to plan rehabilitation and set realistic therapeutic goals regarding functional outcomes.In clinical practice, careful and accurate assessment of pinprick sensation early after the SCI is crucial when predicting function or stratifying patients based on the expected function.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Neurological outcomes after traumatic spinal cord injury are variable and depend on patient-, trauma-, and treatment-related factors as well as on spinal cord injury characteristics, imaging, and biomarkers. OBJECTIVE: The aims of the study were to identify and classify the early predictors of neurological outcomes after traumatic spinal cord injury. DATA SOURCES: The Medline, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Database were searched using medical subject headings. The search was extended to the reference lists of identified studies. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: The study eligibility criteria were assessment of neurological outcomes as primary or secondary outcome, predictors collected during the acute phase after traumatic spinal cord injury, and multivariate design. PARTICIPANTS: The participants were adult patients with traumatic spinal cord injury followed at least 3 mos after injury. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: The quality of studies was assessed by two independent reviewers using the Study Quality Assessment Tools for Observational Cohort and Cross-sectional Studies. The studies' narrative synthesis relied on a classification of the predictors according to quantity, quality, and consistency of the evidence. Results were summarized in a conceptual framework. RESULTS: Forty-nine articles were included. The initial severity of traumatic spinal cord injury (American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale, motor score, and neurological level of injury) was the strongest predictor of neurological outcomes: patients with more severe injury at admission presented poor neurological outcomes. Intramedullary magnetic resonance imaging signal abnormalities were also associated with neurological outcomes, as the presence of intramedullary hemorrhage was a factor of poor prognosis. Other largely studied predictors, such as age and surgical timing, showed some inconsistency in results depending on cutoffs. Younger age and early surgery were generally associated with good outcomes. Although widely studied, other factors, such as vertebral and associated injuries, failed to show association with outcomes. Cerebrospinal fluid inflammatory biomarkers, as emerging factors, were significantly associated with outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a comprehensive review of predictors of neurological outcomes after traumatic spinal cord injury. It also highlights the heterogeneity of outcomes used by studies to assess neurological recovery. The proposed conceptual framework classifies predictors and illustrates their relationships with outcomes.
