Modeling Brain–Heart Crosstalk Information in Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury

Publisher Copyright: © 2021, The Author(s).Background: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is an extremely heterogeneous and complex pathology that requires the integration of different physiological measurements for the optimal understanding and clinical management of patients. Information derived from intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring can be coupled with information obtained from heart rate (HR) monitoring to assess the interplay between brain and heart. The goal of our study is to investigate events of simultaneous increases in HR and ICP and their relationship with patient mortality. Methods: In our previous work, we introduced a novel measure of brain–heart interaction termed brain–heart crosstalks (ctnp), as well as two additional brain–heart crosstalks indicators [mutual information (mict) and average edge overlap (ωct)] obtained through a complex network modeling of the brain–heart system. These measures are based on identification of simultaneous increase of HR and ICP. In this article, we investigated the relationship of these novel indicators with respect to mortality in a multicenter TBI cohort, as part of the Collaborative European Neurotrauma Effectiveness Research in TBI high-resolution work package. Results: A total of 226 patients with TBI were included in this cohort. The data set included monitored parameters (ICP and HR), as well as laboratory, demographics, and clinical information. The number of detected brain–heart crosstalks varied (mean 58, standard deviation 57). The Kruskal–Wallis test comparing brain–heart crosstalks measures of survivors and nonsurvivors showed statistically significant differences between the two distributions (p values: 0.02 for mict, 0.005 for ctnp and 0.006 for ωct). An inverse correlation was found, computed using the point biserial correlation technique, between the three new measures and mortality: − 0.13 for ctnp (p value 0.04), − 0.19 for ωct (p value 0.002969) and − 0.09 for mict (p value 0.1396). The measures were then introduced into the logistic regression framework, along with a set of input predictors made of clinical, demographic, computed tomography (CT), and lab variables. The prediction models were obtained by dividing the original cohort into four age groups (16–29, 30–49, 50–65, and 65–85 years of age) to properly treat with the age confounding factor. The best performing models were for age groups 16–29, 50–65, and 65–85, with the deviance of ratio explaining more than 80% in all the three cases. The presence of an inverse relationship between brain–heart crosstalks and mortality was also confirmed. Conclusions: The presence of a negative relationship between mortality and brain–heart crosstalks indicators suggests that a healthy brain–cardiovascular interaction plays a role in TBI.Peer reviewe

Tracheal intubation in traumatic brain injury : a multicentre prospective observational study

Background: We aimed to study the associations between pre- and in-hospital tracheal intubation and outcomes in traumatic brain injury (TBI), and whether the association varied according to injury severity. Methods: Data from the international prospective pan-European cohort study, Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research for TBI (CENTER-TBI), were used (n=4509). For prehospital intubation, we excluded selfpresenters. For in-hospital intubation, patients whose tracheas were intubated on-scene were excluded. The association between intubation and outcome was analysed with ordinal regression with adjustment for the International Mission for Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials in TBI variables and extracranial injury. We assessed whether the effect of intubation varied by injury severity by testing the added value of an interaction term with likelihood ratio tests. Results: In the prehospital analysis, 890/3736 (24%) patients had their tracheas intubated at scene. In the in-hospital analysis, 460/2930 (16%) patients had their tracheas intubated in the emergency department. There was no adjusted overall effect on functional outcome of prehospital intubation (odds ratio=1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-1.28; P=0.96), and the adjusted overall effect of in-hospital intubation was not significant (odds ratio=0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.65-1.13; P=0.28). However, prehospital intubation was associated with better functional outcome in patients with higher thorax and abdominal Abbreviated Injury Scale scores (P=0.009 and P=0.02, respectively), whereas inhospital intubation was associated with better outcome in patients with lower Glasgow Coma Scale scores (P=0.01): inhospital intubation was associated with better functional outcome in patients with Glasgow Coma Scale scores of 10 or lower. Conclusion: The benefits and harms of tracheal intubation should be carefully evaluated in patients with TBI to optimise benefit. This study suggests that extracranial injury should influence the decision in the prehospital setting, and level of consciousness in the in-hospital setting.Peer reviewe

Tracheal intubation in traumatic brain injury:a multicentre prospective observational study

Background: We aimed to study the associations between pre- and in-hospital tracheal intubation and outcomes in traumatic brain injury (TBI), and whether the association varied according to injury severity.Methods: Data from the international prospective pan-European cohort study, Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research for TBI (CENTER-TBI), were used (n=4509). For prehospital intubation, we excluded selfpresenters. For in-hospital intubation, patients whose tracheas were intubated on-scene were excluded. The association between intubation and outcome was analysed with ordinal regression with adjustment for the International Mission for Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials in TBI variables and extracranial injury. We assessed whether the effect of intubation varied by injury severity by testing the added value of an interaction term with likelihood ratio tests.Results: In the prehospital analysis, 890/3736 (24%) patients had their tracheas intubated at scene. In the in-hospital analysis, 460/2930 (16%) patients had their tracheas intubated in the emergency department. There was no adjusted overall effect on functional outcome of prehospital intubation (odds ratio=1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-1.28; P=0.96), and the adjusted overall effect of in-hospital intubation was not significant (odds ratio=0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.65-1.13; P=0.28). However, prehospital intubation was associated with better functional outcome in patients with higher thorax and abdominal Abbreviated Injury Scale scores (P=0.009 and P=0.02, respectively), whereas inhospital intubation was associated with better outcome in patients with lower Glasgow Coma Scale scores (P=0.01): inhospital intubation was associated with better functional outcome in patients with Glasgow Coma Scale scores of 10 or lower.Conclusion: The benefits and harms of tracheal intubation should be carefully evaluated in patients with TBI to optimise benefit. This study suggests that extracranial injury should influence the decision in the prehospital setting, and level of consciousness in the in-hospital setting.</p

Machine learning algorithms performed no better than regression models for prognostication in traumatic brain injury

Objective: We aimed to explore the added value of common machine learning (ML) algorithms for prediction of outcome for moderate and severe traumatic brain injury. Study Design and Setting: We performed logistic regression (LR), lasso regression, and ridge regression with key baseline predictors in the IMPACT-II database (15 studies, n = 11,022). ML algorithms included support vector machines, random forests, gradient boosting machines, and artificial neural networks and were trained using the same predictors. To assess generalizability of predictions, we performed internal, internal-external, and external validation on the recent CENTER-TBI study (patients with Glasgow Coma Scale Results: In the IMPACT-II database, 3,332/11,022 (30%) died and 5,233(48%) had unfavorable outcome (Glasgow Outcome Scale less than 4). In the CENTER-TBI study, 348/1,554(29%) died and 651(54%) had unfavorable outcome. Discrimination and calibration varied widely between the studies and less so between the studied algorithms. The mean area under the curve was 0.82 for mortality and 0.77 for unfavorable outcomes in the CENTER-TBI study. Conclusion: ML algorithms may not outperform traditional regression approaches in a low-dimensional setting for outcome prediction after moderate or severe traumatic brain injury. Similar to regression-based prediction models, ML algorithms should be rigorously validated to ensure applicability to new populations. (C) 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.Peer reviewe

Prehospital Management of Traumatic Brain Injury across Europe: A CENTER-TBI Study.

BACKGROUND: Prehospital care for traumatic brain injury (TBI) is important to prevent secondary brain injury. We aim to compare prehospital care systems within Europe and investigate the association of system characteristics with the stability of patients at hospital arrival. METHODS: We studied TBI patients who were transported to CENTER-TBI centers, a pan-European, prospective TBI cohort study, by emergency medical services between 2014 and 2017. The association of demographic factors, injury severity, situational factors, and interventions associated with on-scene time was assessed using linear regression. We used mixed effects models to investigate the case mix adjusted variation between countries in prehospital times and interventions. The case mix adjusted impact of on-scene time and interventions on hypoxia (oxygen saturation <90%) and hypotension (systolic blood pressure <100mmHg) at hospital arrival was analyzed with logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 3878 patients, the greatest driver of longer on-scene time was intubation (+8.3 min, 95% CI: 5.6-11.1). Secondary referral was associated with shorter on-scene time (-5.0 min 95% CI: -6.2- -3.8). Between countries, there was a large variation in response (range: 12-25 min), on-scene (range: 16-36 min) and travel time (range: 15-32 min) and in prehospital interventions. These variations were not explained by patient factors such as conscious level or severity of injury (expected OR between countries: 1.8 for intubation, 1.8 for IV fluids, 2.0 for helicopter). On-scene time was not associated with the regional EMS policy (p= 0.58). Hypotension and/or hypoxia were seen in 180 (6%) and 97 (3%) patients in the overall cohort and in 13% and 7% of patients with severe TBI (GCS <8). The largest association with secondary insults at hospital arrival was with major extracranial injury: the OR was 3.6 (95% CI: 2.6-5.0) for hypotension and 4.4 (95% CI: 2.9-6.7) for hypoxia. DISCUSSION: Hypoxia and hypotension continue to occur in patients who suffer a TBI, and remain relatively common in severe TBI. Substantial variation in prehospital care exists for patients after TBI in Europe, which is only partially explained by patient factors

Variation in guideline implementation and adherence regarding severe traumatic brain injury treatment: a CENTER-TBI survey study in Europe

Guidelines may reduce practice variation and optimize patient care. We aimed to study differences in guideline use in the management of traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients and analyze reasons for guideline non-adherence. As part of a prospective, observational, multi-center European cohort study, participants from 68 centers in 20 countries were asked to complete 72-item questionnaires regarding their management of severe TBI. Six questions with multiple sub-questions focused on guideline use and implementation. Questionnaires were completed by 65 centers. Of these, 49 (75%) reported use of the Brain Trauma Foundation Guidelines for the medical management of TBI or related institutional protocols, 11 (17%) used no guidelines and 5 used other guidelines (8%). Of 54 centers reporting use of any guidelines, 41 (75%) relied on written guidelines. Four centers of the 54 (7%) reported no formal implementation efforts. Structural attention to the guidelines during daily clinical rounds was reported by 21 centers (38%). The most often reported reasons for non-adherence were ‘every patient is unique’ and the presence of extracranial injuries, both for centers that did and did not report the use of guidelines. There is substantial variability in the use and implementation of guidelines in neurotrauma centers in Europe. Further research is needed to strengthen the evidence underlying guidelines and to overcome implementation barriers

Development of prognostic models for Health-Related Quality of Life following traumatic brain injury

Background Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading cause of impairments affecting Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL). We aimed to identify predictors of and develop prognostic models for HRQoL following TBI. Methods We used data from the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) Core study, including patients with a clinical diagnosis of TBI and an indication for computed tomography presenting within 24 h of injury. The primary outcome measures were the SF-36v2 physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) health component summary scores and the Quality of Life after Traumatic Brain Injury (QOLIBRI) total score 6 months post injury. We considered 16 patient and injury characteristics in linear regression analyses. Model performance was expressed as proportion of variance explained (R-2) and corrected for optimism with bootstrap procedures. Results 2666 Adult patients completed the HRQoL questionnaires. Most were mild TBI patients (74%). The strongest predictors for PCS were Glasgow Coma Scale, major extracranial injury, and pre-injury health status, while MCS and QOLIBRI were mainly related to pre-injury mental health problems, level of education, and type of employment. R-2 of the full models was 19% for PCS, 9% for MCS, and 13% for the QOLIBRI. In a subset of patients following predominantly mild TBI (N = 436), including 2 week HRQoL assessment improved model performance substantially (R-2 PCS 15% to 37%, MCS 12% to 36%, and QOLIBRI 10% to 48%). Conclusion Medical and injury-related characteristics are of greatest importance for the prediction of PCS, whereas patient-related characteristics are more important for the prediction of MCS and the QOLIBRI following TBI.Development and application of statistical models for medical scientific researchAnalysis and support of clinical decision makin

Machine learning algorithms performed no better than regression models for prognostication in traumatic brain injury.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to explore the added value of common machine learning (ML) algorithms for prediction of outcome for moderate and severe traumatic brain injury. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We performed logistic regression (LR), lasso regression, and ridge regression with key baseline predictors in the IMPACT-II database (15 studies, n = 11,022). ML algorithms included support vector machines, random forests, gradient boosting machines, and artificial neural networks and were trained using the same predictors. To assess generalizability of predictions, we performed internal, internal-external, and external validation on the recent CENTER-TBI study (patients with Glasgow Coma Scale <13, n = 1,554). Both calibration (calibration slope/intercept) and discrimination (area under the curve) was quantified. RESULTS: In the IMPACT-II database, 3,332/11,022 (30%) died and 5,233(48%) had unfavorable outcome (Glasgow Outcome Scale less than 4). In the CENTER-TBI study, 348/1,554(29%) died and 651(54%) had unfavorable outcome. Discrimination and calibration varied widely between the studies and less so between the studied algorithms. The mean area under the curve was 0.82 for mortality and 0.77 for unfavorable outcomes in the CENTER-TBI study. CONCLUSION: ML algorithms may not outperform traditional regression approaches in a low-dimensional setting for outcome prediction after moderate or severe traumatic brain injury. Similar to regression-based prediction models, ML algorithms should be rigorously validated to ensure applicability to new populations

Modeling Brain-Heart Crosstalk Information in Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury.

Funder: Università degli Studi di SienaBACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is an extremely heterogeneous and complex pathology that requires the integration of different physiological measurements for the optimal understanding and clinical management of patients. Information derived from intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring can be coupled with information obtained from heart rate (HR) monitoring to assess the interplay between brain and heart. The goal of our study is to investigate events of simultaneous increases in HR and ICP and their relationship with patient mortality.. METHODS: In our previous work, we introduced a novel measure of brain-heart interaction termed brain-heart crosstalks (ctnp), as well as two additional brain-heart crosstalks indicators [mutual information ([Formula: see text]) and average edge overlap (ωct)] obtained through a complex network modeling of the brain-heart system. These measures are based on identification of simultaneous increase of HR and ICP. In this article, we investigated the relationship of these novel indicators with respect to mortality in a multicenter TBI cohort, as part of the Collaborative European Neurotrauma Effectiveness Research in TBI high-resolution work package. RESULTS: A total of 226 patients with TBI were included in this cohort. The data set included monitored parameters (ICP and HR), as well as laboratory, demographics, and clinical information. The number of detected brain-heart crosstalks varied (mean 58, standard deviation 57). The Kruskal-Wallis test comparing brain-heart crosstalks measures of survivors and nonsurvivors showed statistically significant differences between the two distributions (p values: 0.02 for [Formula: see text], 0.005 for ctnp and 0.006 for ωct). An inverse correlation was found, computed using the point biserial correlation technique, between the three new measures and mortality: - 0.13 for ctnp (p value 0.04), - 0.19 for ωct (p value 0.002969) and - 0.09 for [Formula: see text] (p value 0.1396). The measures were then introduced into the logistic regression framework, along with a set of input predictors made of clinical, demographic, computed tomography (CT), and lab variables. The prediction models were obtained by dividing the original cohort into four age groups (16-29, 30-49, 50-65, and 65-85 years of age) to properly treat with the age confounding factor. The best performing models were for age groups 16-29, 50-65, and 65-85, with the deviance of ratio explaining more than 80% in all the three cases. The presence of an inverse relationship between brain-heart crosstalks and mortality was also confirmed. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of a negative relationship between mortality and brain-heart crosstalks indicators suggests that a healthy brain-cardiovascular interaction plays a role in TBI

Variation in the practice of tracheal intubation in Europe after traumatic brain injury: a prospective cohort study.

Traumatic brain injury patients frequently undergo tracheal intubation. We aimed to assess current intubation practice in Europe and identify variation in practice. We analysed data from patients with traumatic brain injury included in the prospective cohort study collaborative European neurotrauma effectiveness research in traumatic brain injury (CENTER-TBI) in 45 centres in 16 European countries. We included patients who were transported to hospital by emergency medical services. We used mixed-effects multinomial regression to quantify the effects on pre-hospital or in-hospital tracheal intubation of the following: patient characteristics; injury characteristics; centre; and trauma system characteristics. A total of 3843 patients were included. Of these, 1322 (34%) had their tracheas intubated; 839 (22%) pre-hospital and 483 (13%) in-hospital. The fit of the model with only patient characteristics predicting intubation was good (Nagelkerke R2 64%). The probability of tracheal intubation increased with the following: younger age; lower pre-hospital or emergency department GCS; higher abbreviated injury scale scores (head and neck, thorax and chest, face or abdomen abbreviated injury score); and one or more unreactive pupils. The adjusted median odds ratio for intubation between two randomly chosen centres was 3.1 (95%CI 2.1-4.3) for pre-hospital intubation, and 2.7 (95%CI 1.9-3.5) for in-hospital intubation. Furthermore, the presence of an anaesthetist was independently associated with more pre-hospital intubation (OR 2.9, 95%CI 1.3-6.6), in contrast to the presence of ambulance personnel who are allowed to intubate (OR 0.5, 95%CI 0.3-0.8). In conclusion, patient and injury characteristics are key drivers of tracheal intubation. Between-centre differences were also substantial. Further studies are needed to improve the evidence base supporting recommendations for tracheal intubation