Intracranial bleeding in patients with traumatic brain injury: A prognostic study

BACKGROUND: Intracranial bleeding (IB) is a common and serious consequence of traumatic brain injury (TBI). IB can be classified according to the location into: epidural haemorrhage (EDH) subdural haemorrhage (SDH) intraparenchymal haemorrhage (IPH) and subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH). Studies involving repeated CT scanning of TBI patients have found that IB can develop or expand in the 48 hours after injury. If IB enlarges after hospital admission and larger bleeds have a worse prognosis, this would provide a therapeutic rationale for treatments to prevent increase in the extent of bleeding. We analysed data from the Trauma Audit & Research Network (TARN), a large European trauma registry, to evaluate the association between the size of IB and mortality in patients with TBI. METHODS: We analysed 13,962 patients presenting to TARN participating hospitals between 2001 and 2008 with a Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) less than 15 at presentation or any head injury with Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) severity code 3 and above. The extent of intracranial bleeding was determined by the AIS code. Potential confounders were age, presenting Glasgow Coma Score, mechanism of injury, presence and nature of other brain injuries, and presence of extra-cranial injuries. The outcomes were in-hospital mortality and haematoma evacuation. We conducted a multivariable logistic regression analysis to evaluate the independent effect of large and small size of IB, in comparison with no bleeding, on patient outcomes. We also conducted a multivariable logistic regression analysis to assess the independent effect on mortality of large IB in comparison with small IB. RESULTS: Almost 46% of patients had at some type of IB. Subdural haemorrhages were present in 30% of the patients, with epidural and intraparenchymal present in approximately 22% each. After adjusting for potential confounders, we found that large IB, wherever located, was associated with increased mortality in comparison with no bleeding. We also found that large IB was associated with an increased risk of mortality in comparison with small IB. The odds ratio for mortality for large SDH, IPH and EDH, in comparison with small bleeds, were: 3.41 (95% CI: 2.684.33), 3.47 (95% CI: 2.265.33) and 2.86 (95% CI: 1.864.38) respectively. CONCLUSION: Large EDH, SDH and IPH are associated with a substantially higher probability of hospital mortality in comparison with small IB. However, the limitations of our data, such as the large proportion of missing data and lack of data on other confounding factors, such as localization of the bleeding, make the results of this report only explanatory. Future studies should also evaluate the effect of IB size on functional outcomes

Systematic review of prognostic models in traumatic brain injury

BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading cause of death and disability world-wide. The ability to accurately predict patient outcome after TBI has an important role in clinical practice and research. Prognostic models are statistical models that combine two or more items of patient data to predict clinical outcome. They may improve predictions in TBI patients. Multiple prognostic models for TBI have accumulated for decades but none of them is widely used in clinical practice. The objective of this systematic review is to critically assess existing prognostic models for TBI METHODS: Studies that combine at least two variables to predict any outcome in patients with TBI were searched in PUBMED and EMBASE. Two reviewers independently examined titles, abstracts and assessed whether each met the pre-defined inclusion criteria. RESULTS: A total of 53 reports including 102 models were identified. Almost half (47%) were derived from adult patients. Three quarters of the models included less than 500 patients. Most of the models (93%) were from high income countries populations. Logistic regression was the most common analytical strategy to derived models (47%). In relation to the quality of the derivation models (n:66), only 15% reported less than 10% pf loss to follow-up, 68% did not justify the rationale to include the predictors, 11% conducted an external validation and only 19% of the logistic models presented the results in a clinically user-friendly way CONCLUSION: Prognostic models are frequently published but they are developed from small samples of patients, their methodological quality is poor and they are rarely validated on external populations. Furthermore, they are not clinically practical as they are not presented to physicians in a user-friendly way. Finally because only a few are developed using populations from low and middle income countries, where most of trauma occurs, the generalizability to these setting is limited