Machine Learning Identifies Variation in Timing of Palliative Care Consultations Among Traumatic Brain Injury Patients.

Background and Objective Timely palliative care involvement offers demonstrable benefits for traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients; however, palliative care consultations (PCCs) are used inconsistently during TBI management. This study aimed to employ advanced machine learning techniques to elucidate the primary drivers of PCC timing variability for TBI patients. Methods Data on admission, hospital course, and outcomes were collected for a cohort of 232 TBI patients who received both PCCs and neurosurgical consultations during the same hospitalization. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and K-means clustering were used to identify patient phenotypes, which were then compared using Kaplan-Meier analysis. An extreme gradient boosting model (XGBoost) was employed to determine drivers of PCC timing, with model interpretation performed using SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP). Results Cluster A (n = 86) consisted mainly of older (median [IQR] = 87 [78, 94] years), White females with mild TBIs and demonstrated the shortest time-to-PCC (2.5 [1.0, 7.0] days). Cluster B (n = 108) also sustained mild TBIs but comprised moderately younger (81 [75, 86] years) married White males with later PCC (5.0 [3.0, 10.8] days). Cluster C (n = 38) represented much younger (46.5 [29.5, 59.8] years), more severely injured, non-White patients with the latest PCC initiation (9.0 [4.2, 17.0] days). The clusters did not differ by discharge disposition (p = 0.4) or frequency inpatient mortality (p > 0.9); however, Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed a significant difference in the time from admission to PCC (p < 0.001), despite no differences in time from admission to mortality (p = 0.18). SHAP analysis of the XGBoost model identified age, sex, and race as the most influential drivers of PCC timing. Conclusions This study highlights crucial disparities in PCC timing for TBI patients and underscores the need for targeted strategies to ensure timely and equitable palliative care integration for this vulnerable population.

Craniotomy versus craniectomy for traumatic acute subdural hematoma-coarsened exact matched analysis of outcomes.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Acute subdural hematoma (aSDH) after traumatic brain injury frequently requires emergent craniotomy (CO) or decompressive craniectomy (DC). We sought to determine the variables associated with either surgical approach and to compare outcomes between matched patients. METHODS: A multi-center retrospective review was used to identify traumatic aSDH patients who underwent CO or DC. Patient variables independently associated with surgical approach were used for coarsened exact matching.Multivariate logistic regression and multivariate Cox proportional-hazards regression wereconducted on matched patients to determine independent predictors of mortality. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients underwent CO and sixty-two underwent DC for aSDH evacuation. DC patients were21.4 years younger (P < 0.001), more likely to be male (80.6 % vs 60.5 %,P = 0.011), and present with GCS ≤ 8 (64.5 % vs 36.8 %,P = 0.001). Age (P < 0.001), epidural hematoma (P = 0.01), skull fracture (P = 0.001), and cisternal effacement (P = 0.02) were independently associated with surgical approach. After coarsened exact matching, DC (P = 0.008), older age (P = 0.007), male sex (P = 0.04), and intraventricular hemorrhage (P = 0.02), were independently associated with inpatient mortality. Multivariate Cox proportional-hazards regression demonstrated that DC was independently associated with mortality at 90-days (P = 0.001) and 1-year post-operation (P = 0.003). CONCLUSION: aSDH patients who receive surgical evacuation via DC as opposed to CO are younger, more likely to be male, and have worse clinical exam. After controlling for patient differences via coarsened exact matching, DC is independently associated with mortality.

Impact of Antithrombotic Medications and Reversal Strategies on the Surgical Management and Outcomes of Traumatic Acute Subdural Hematoma.

OBJECTIVE: Careful hematologic management is required in surgical patients with traumatic acute subdural hematoma (aSDH) taking antithrombotic medications. We sought to compare outcomes between patients with aSDH taking antithrombotic medications at admission who received antithrombotic reversal with patients with aSDH not taking antithrombotics. METHODS: Retrospective review identified patients with traumatic aSDH requiring surgical evacuation. The cohort was divided based on antithrombotic use and whether pharmacologic reversal agents or platelet transfusions were administered. A 3-way comparison of outcomes was performed between patients taking anticoagulants who received pharmacologic reversal, patients taking antiplatelets who received platelet transfusion, and patients not taking antithrombotics. Multivariable regressions, adjusted for injury severity, further investigated associations with outcomes. RESULTS: Of 138 patients who met inclusion criteria, 13.0% (n = 18) reported taking anticoagulants, 16.7% (n = 23) reported taking antiplatelets, and 3.6% (n = 5) reported taking both. Patients taking antiplatelets who received platelet transfusion had longer intraoperative times (P = 0.040) and higher rates of palliative care consultations (P = 0.046) compared with patients taking anticoagulants who received pharmacologic reversal and patients not taking antithrombotics. Across groups, no significant differences were found in frequency of in-hospital intracranial hemorrhage and venous thromboembolism, length of hospital stay, rate of inpatient mortality, or follow-up health status. In multivariable analysis, intraoperative time remained longest for the antiplatelets with platelet transfusion group. Other outcomes were not associated with patient group. CONCLUSIONS: Among surgical patients with traumatic aSDH, those taking antiplatelet medications who receive platelet transfusions experience longer intraoperative procedure times and higher rates of palliative care consultation. Comparable outcomes were observed between patients receiving antithrombotic reversal and patients not taking antithrombotics.