Articles: outcome.
-
Retrospective review of prospectively-collected registry data. ⋯ Although patients with NPP had slightly poorer function and quality of life, all patients experienced a clinically meaningful improvement in patient-reported outcomes, regardless of the predominant pain location. High rates of satisfaction and return-to-work were also achieved. In the context of proper indications, these findings suggest that ACDF can be equally effective for DCR patients with varying combinations of NP or AP.Level of Evidence: 3.
-
Observational study. ⋯ Results show a relationship between impaired muscle regeneration profile in multifidus muscle and poor outcome following microdiscectomy for LDH. Inflammatory dysregulation in subcutaneous fat overlying the back region might predict poor surgical outcome.Level of Evidence: 4.
-
Retrospective cohort study. ⋯ To our knowledge, this is the largest multicenter study examining the safety of two-level outpatient CDR procedures. Outpatient two-level CDR was associated with similarly safe outcomes when compared to inpatient two-level CDR and outpatient two-level ACDF. This suggests that two-level CDR can be performed safely in the outpatient setting.Level of Evidence: 3.
-
Journal of neurotrauma · May 2021
Outcome Prediction after Moderate and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: External Validation of Two Established Prognostic Models in 1742 European Patients.
The International Mission on Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials in Traumatic Brain Injury (IMPACT) and Corticoid Randomisation After Significant Head injury (CRASH) prognostic models predict functional outcome after moderate and severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). We aimed to assess their performance in a contemporary cohort of patients across Europe. The Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) core study is a prospective, observational cohort study in patients presenting with TBI and an indication for brain computed tomography. ⋯ For CRASH, AUCs ranged between 0.82 and 0.88 in 1742 patients and between 0.66 and 0.80 in the stricter IMPACT selection (n = 1173). Calibration of the IMPACT and CRASH models was generally moderate, with calibration-in-the-large and calibration slopes ranging between -2.02 and 0.61 and between 0.48 and 1.39, respectively. The IMPACT and CRASH models adequately identify patients at high risk for mortality or unfavorable outcome, which supports their use in research settings and for benchmarking in the context of quality-of-care assessment.
-
A dramatic disorder tentatively attributed to diencephalic-hypothalamic damage or dysfunction, dysautonomia, affects recovery from brain injury. Its incidence, correlation with etiology, and relevance as a predictor of outcome were retrospectively surveyed in 333 patients in vegetative state (VS) for more than 2 weeks at admission. Outcome was assessed according to the Glasgow Outcome Scale. ⋯ Dysautonomia occurred in 26.1% of patients, with greater incidence among post-traumatic (31.9%) than non-traumatic (15.8%) patients. Outcome was worse among non-traumatic than post-traumatic patients irrespective of dysautonomia, and worst among non-traumatic patients with dysautonomia. Dysautonomia proved common among patients in VS (with incidence depending on etiology and age) and influenced the patients' outcome through mechanisms still to be defined, but conceivably mediated by diencephalic-hypothalamic unbalance.