Comparison of Outcomes in Level I vs Level II Trauma Centers in Patients Undergoing Craniotomy or Craniectomy for Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) carries a devastatingly high rate of morbidity and mortality. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether patients undergoing craniotomy/craniectomy for severe TBI fare better at level I than level II trauma centers in a mature trauma system. METHODS: The data were extracted from the Pennsylvania Trauma Outcome Study database. Inclusion criteria were patients \u3e 18 yr with severe TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] score less than 9) undergoing craniotomy or craniectomy in the state of Pennsylvania from January 1, 2002 through September 30, 2017. RESULTS: Of 3980 patients, 2568 (64.5%) were treated at level I trauma centers and 1412 (35.5%) at level II centers. Baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 groups except for significantly worse GCS scores at admission in level I centers (P = .002). The rate of in-hospital mortality was 37.6% in level I centers vs 40.4% in level II centers (P = .08). Mean Functional Independence Measure (FIM) scores at discharge were significantly higher in level I (10.9 ± 5.5) than level II centers (9.8 ± 5.3; P \u3c .005). In multivariate analysis, treatment at level II trauma centers was significantly associated with in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 1.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.37; P = .01) and worse FIM scores (odds ratio, 1.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-1.7; P = .001). Mean hospital and ICU length of stay were significantly longer in level I centers (P \u3c .005). CONCLUSION: This study showed superior functional outcomes and lower mortality rates in patients undergoing a neurosurgical procedure for severe TBI in level I trauma centers

Improving Serial Imaging Protocols in Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage

There is no universally agreed upon protocol to image patient presenting with intra-parenchymal hemorrhage of non-traumatic etiology (sICH). At our institution, it is common practice for a patient to have 3 CT’s done within 24 hours. They are often at onset of symptoms or presentation, 6 hours post onset of symptoms, and finally 24 hours post bleed onset. The goal of this project will be to assess the safety and efficacy of obtaining this repeat imaging in our patients in the hopes that limiting unnecessary CT head studies will decrease resource utilization, decrease patient radiation, expedite movement of stable patients out of the ICU and/or disposition

Feasibility and initial experience of left radial approach for diagnostic neuroangiography.

Neuroangiography has seen a recent shift from transfemoral to transradial access. In transradial neuroangiography, the right dominant hand is the main access used. However, the left side may be used specifically for left posterior circulation pathologies and when right access cannot be used. This study describes our initial experience with left radial access for diagnostic neuroangiography and assesses the feasibility and safety of this technique. We performed a retrospective review of a prospective database of consecutive patients between April 2018 and January 2020, and identified 20 patients whom a left radial access was used for neurovascular procedures. Left transradial neuroangiography was successful in all 20 patients and provided the sought diagnostic information; no patient required conversion to right radial or femoral access. Pathology consisted of anterior circulation aneurysms in 17 patients (85%), brain tumor in 1 patient (5%), and intracranial atherosclerosis disease involving the middle cerebral artery in 2 patients (10%). The left radial artery was accessed at the anatomic snuffbox in 18 patients (90%) and the wrist in 2 patients (10%). A single vessel was accessed in 7 (35%), two vessels in 8 (40%), three vessels in 4 (20%), and four vessels in 1 (5%). Catheterization was successful in 71% of the cases for the right internal carotid artery and in only 7.7% for the left internal carotid artery. There were no instances of radial artery spasm, radial artery occlusion, or procedural complications. Our initial experience found the left transradial access to be a potentially feasible approach for diagnostic neuroangiography even beyond the left vertebral artery. The approach is strongly favored by patients but has significant limitations compared with the right-sided approach

Surgical Evacuation for Chronic Subdural Hematoma: Predictors of Reoperation and Functional Outcomes

Background Although chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH) incidence has increased, there is limited evidence to guide patient management after surgical evacuation. Objective To identify predictors of reoperation and functional outcome after CSDH surgical evacuation. Methods We identified all patients with CSDH between 2010 and 2018. Clinical and radiographic variables were collected from the medical records. Outcomes included reoperation within 90 days and poor (3–6) modified Rankin Scale score at 3 months. Results We identified 461 surgically treated CSDH cases (396 patients). The mean age was 70.1 years, 29.7 % were females, 298 (64.6 %) underwent burr hole evacuation, 152 (33.0 %) craniotomy, and 11 (2.4 %) craniectomy. Reoperation rate within 90 days was 12.6 %, whereas 24.2 % of cases had a poor functional status at 3 months. Only female sex was associated with reoperation within 90 days (OR = 2.09, 95 % CI: 1.17–3.75, P = 0.013). AMS on admission (OR = 5.19, 95 % CI: 2.15–12.52, P \u3c 0.001) and female sex (OR = 3.90, 95 % CI: 1.57–9.70, P = 0.003) were independent predictors of poor functional outcome at 3 months. Conclusion Careful management of patients with the above predictive factors may reduce CSDH reoperation and improve long-term functional outcomes. However, larger randomized studies are necessary to assess long-term prognosis after surgical evacuation

178 Comparison of Outcomes in Level I versus Level II Trauma Centers in Patients Undergoing Craniotomy or Craniectomy for Severe Traumatic Brain Injury

Abstract INTRODUCTION Traumatic brain injury (TBI) still carries a devastatingly high rate of morbidity and mortality. This study is the first to assess whether patients undergoing a craniotomy or craniectomy for severe TBI fare better at level I than level II trauma centers. METHODS The data were extracted from the Pennsylvania Trauma Outcome Study database (the Pennsylvania Trauma Systems Foundation statewide trauma registry), which contains data collected by each of the 31 accredited level I and II trauma centers in the state. Inclusion criteria were patients older than the age of 18 yr with severe TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] score of lower than 9) undergoing craniotomy or craniectomy in the state of Pennsylvania between January 2002 and September 2017. RESULTS Of 3980 patients, 2568 (64.5%) were treated at level I trauma centers and 1412 (35.5%) at level II centers. Baseline characteristics were grossly similar between the 2 groups except for significantly worse GCS scores at admission in level I centers (P = .002). The rate of in-hospital mortality was 37.6% in level I trauma centers versus 40.4% in level II trauma centers (P = .08). Likewise, mean FIM scores at discharge were significantly higher in level I (10.9 ± 5.5) than level II centers (9.8 ± 5.3; P < .005). In multivariate analysis, treatment at a level II trauma center significantly predicted in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR] 1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-1.37; P = .01) and worse FIM scores (OR 1.4; 95% CI 1.1-1.7; P = .001). Mean hospital and intensive care unit length of stay were significantly longer in level I centers (P < .005). CONCLUSION Even in a mature trauma system, patients undergoing craniotomy or craniectomy for severe TBI have superior functional outcomes and lower mortality rates in level I compared with level II trauma centers. The findings support the rapid transfer of such patients to level I trauma centers

Pediatric Transradial Approach

Neuroendovascular surgery has become an indispensable domain in the treatment of cerebrovascular disease with a slew of treatment options for numerous pathologies. The field experienced a movement toward a transradial approach for diagnostic and interventional procedures. Advantages of the transradial approach include lower risk for complications, which can be fatal using the transfemoral route, higher patient satisfaction, and shorter hospital stays. Those advantages are not unique to the adult population but are, in fact, even more pronounced in pediatrics. They include early mobilization of patients since flat bed rest is not required as it is with transfemoral puncture for hemostasis at the groin. This also obviates the need for continuous intravenous sedatives, which is fraught with its own risks. Early reports have demonstrated the feasibility of transradial cerebral angiography in children. Others have also shown that the transradial approach can be safely used to administer intraarterial chemotherapy in children with retinoblastoma. A standardized protocol is imperative to maximize the success rate of the transradial approach in pediatrics and includes the routine use of ultrasound as well as a “radial cocktail” to avoid vasospasm. While transfemoral may be the conventional route, transradial offers a plethora of advantages, particularly in children. As more experience in transradial is gained in adults, it is likely that this will translate into more transradial procedures in children as well

Reduction of the Duration of Contact Precautions in Patients with a Positive MRSA Swab

Background Contact precautions (CP) in hospitals are a method of infection control in the transmission of multi-drug resistant organisms. Unfortunately, even though colonization with nasal methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is common in asymptomatic patients (3.8-4.5%) (6,7), patients are screened for nasal MRSA since it associated with higher morbidity and mortality. However, those who test positive for nasal MRSA are kept on CP even with a cleared MRSA infection(1). At TJUH, patients were kept on CP for 24 months after a positive swab regardless of location. This, unfortunately, led to unintended negative consequences: delay in patient transfer to other facilities (e. g. rehabilitation) (3), lower patient satisfaction (4), decreased health care provider time with patients (5), and increased health care expenditures.https://jdc.jefferson.edu/patientsafetyposters/1102/thumbnail.jp

Discrepancies in Stroke Distribution and Dataset Origin in Machine Learning for Stroke.

BACKGROUND: Machine learning algorithms depend on accurate and representative datasets for training in order to become valuable clinical tools that are widely generalizable to a varied population. We aim to conduct a review of machine learning uses in stroke literature to assess the geographic distribution of datasets and patient cohorts used to train these models and compare them to stroke distribution to evaluate for disparities. AIMS: 582 studies were identified on initial searching of the PubMed database. Of these studies, 106 full texts were assessed after title and abstract screening which resulted in 489 papers excluded. Of these 106 studies, 79 were excluded due to using cohorts from outside the United States or being review articles or editorials. 27 studies were thus included in this analysis. SUMMARY OF REVIEW: Of the 27 studies included, 7 (25.9%) used patient data from California, 6 (22.2%) were multicenter, 3 (11.1%) were in Massachusetts, 2 (7.4%) each in Illinois, Missouri, and New York, and 1 (3.7%) each from South Carolina, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. 1 (3.7%) study used data from Utah and Texas. These were qualitatively compared to a CDC study showing the highest distribution of stroke in Mississippi (4.3%) followed by Oklahoma (3.4%), Washington D.C. (3.4%), Louisiana (3.3%), and Alabama (3.2%) while the prevalence in California was 2.6%. CONCLUSIONS: It is clear that a strong disconnect exists between the datasets and patient cohorts used in training machine learning algorithms in clinical research and the stroke distribution in which clinical tools using these algorithms will be implemented. In order to ensure a lack of bias and increase generalizability and accuracy in future machine learning studies, datasets using a varied patient population that reflects the unequal distribution of stroke risk factors would greatly benefit the usability of these tools and ensure accuracy on a nationwide scale

A Machine Learning Approach to First Pass Reperfusion in Mechanical Thrombectomy: Prediction and Feature Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Novel machine learning (ML) methods are being investigated across medicine for their predictive capabilities while boasting increased adaptability and generalizability. In our study, we compare logistic regression with machine learning for feature importance analysis and prediction in first-pass reperfusion. METHODS: We retrospectively identified cases of ischemic stroke treated with mechanical thrombectomy (MT) at our institution from 2012-2018. Significant variables used in predictive modeling were demographic characteristics, medical history, admission NIHSS, and stroke characteristics. Outcome was binarized TICI on first pass (0-2a vs 2b-3). Shapley feature importance plots were used to identify variables that strongly affected outcomes. RESULTS: Accuracy for the Random Forest and SVM models were 67.1% compared to 65.8% for the logistic regression model. Brier score was lower for the Random Forest model (0.329 vs 0.342) indicating better predictive capability. Other supervised learning models performed worse than the logistic regression model, with accuracy of 56.2% for Naïve Bayes and 61.6% for XGBoost. Shapley plots for the Random Forest model showed use of aspiration, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, use of stent retriever, and time between symptom onset and catheterization as the top five predictors of first pass reperfusion. CONCLUSION: Use of machine learning models, such as Random Forest, for the study of MT outcomes, is more accurate than logistic regression for our dataset, and identifies new factors that contribute to achieving first pass reperfusion. The benefits of machine learning, such as improved predictive capabilities, integration of new data, and generalizability, establish ML as the preferred model for studying outcomes in stroke

Coil Embolization with Subsequent Subacute Flow Diversion Before Hospital Discharge as a Treatment Paradigm for Ruptured Aneurysms

Subtotal coil embolization followed by subsequent flow diversion is often pursued for treatment of acutely ruptured aneurysms. Owing to the need for anti-platelet therapy, the optimal time of safely pursuing flow diversion treatment has not been fully elucidated. In this study, we aim to demonstrate the safety and feasibility of staged treatment of acutely ruptured aneurysms with early coil embolization followed by flow diversion prior to discharge. A retrospective study to evaluate clinical outcomes of patients who presented with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage and underwent coil embolization followed by subacute flow diversion treatment during the same hospitalization. A total of 18 patients are included in our case series. Eight patients presented with Hunt-Hess (H-H) grade 2 bleed, 6 patients with H-H grade 3, and 2 patients each with H-H grade 4 and H-H grade 1. Eight patients required placement of an external ventricular drain on admission. After initial coil embolization, 12 achieved Raymond-Roy grade 2 occlusion, and 6 attained grade 3a/b occlusion. The mean duration between coil embolization and subsequent flow diversion was 9.83 days (range: 1–30). There were no instances of re-hemorrhage between initial coil embolization and subsequent flow diversion treatment. Sixteen patients had a minimum of 6-month follow-up, of which 15 were found to have complete occlusion, and 1 required subsequent clipping. Subtotal coil embolization followed by definitive treatment using flow diversion during the same hospitalization is feasible and achieves excellent aneurysm occlusion rates while avoiding dual anti-platelet therapy during the initial hemorrhage period