Journal of neurotrauma
-
Journal of neurotrauma · Dec 2024
Multicenter StudyAssociation between admission systolic blood pressure and outcomes in patients with isolated traumatic brain injury: A cross-national multicentre cohort study.
The optimal prehospital blood pressure in patients following traumatic brain injury (TBI) remains controversial. We aimed to assess the association between the systolic blood pressure (SBP) at emergency department triage and patient outcomes following isolated moderate-to-severe TBI. We conducted a cross-national multicenter retrospective cohort study using the Pan-Asia Trauma Outcomes Study database from January 1, 2016, to November 30, 2018. ⋯ As for the secondary outcome, the aORs and 95% CIs were 1.36 (0.68-2.68) of <100 mmHg, 0.99 (0.57-1.70) of 120-139 mmHg, 1.23 (0.67-2.25) of 140-159 mmHg, and 1.52 (0.78-2.95) of ≥160 mmHg. Subgroup analyses revealed trends of the best outcomes in both moderate and severe TBI patients with SBP 100-119 mmHg, whereas statistical significance appeared only in patients with severe TBI. SBP of 110-119 mmHg at triage is associated with the lowest 30-day mortality in patients following isolated moderate-to-severe TBI and possibly related to a better functional outcome.
-
Journal of neurotrauma · Dec 2024
Multicenter Study Observational StudyVolumetric assessment of traumatic intracranial hematomas: is ABC/2 reliable?
Accurate measurement of traumatic intracranial hematoma volume is important for assessing disease progression and prognosis, as well as for serving as an important end-point 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. ⋯ 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.