Predicting Outcomes in Patients with Diffuse Axonal Injury: External Validation of the Widely Used Prognostic Instruments.

AIM: Accurate prognosis of diffuse axonal injury (DAI) is important in directing clinical care, allocating resources appropriately, and communicating with families and surrogate decision-makers. METHODS: A study was conducted on patients with clinical DAI due to closed-head traumatic brain injury treated at a trauma center in Brazil from July 2013 to September 2015.  The objective efficacy of the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), Trauma and Injury Severity Scoring system (TRISS), New Trauma and Injury Severity Scoring system (NTRISS), Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS)/head, Corticosteroid Randomization After Significant Head Injury (CRASH), and International Mission on Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials (IMPACT) models in the prediction of mortality at 14 days and 6-months and unfavorable outcomes at 6 months was tested. RESULTS: Our cohort comprised 95 prospectively recruited adults (85 males, 10 females, mean age 30.3 ± 10.9 years) admitted with DAI. Model efficacy was assessed through discrimination (area under the curve [AUC]), and Cox calibration. The AIS/head, TRISS, NTRISS, CRASH, and IMPACT models were able to discriminate both mortality and unfavorable outcomes (AUC 0.78-0.87). IMPACT models resulted in a statistically perfect calibration for both 6-month outcome variables; mortality and 6-month unfavorable outcome. Calibration also revealed that TRISS, NTRISS, and CRASH systematically overpredicted both outcomes, except for 6-month unfavorable outcome with TRISS. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that TRISS, NTRISS, CRASH, and IMPACT models satisfactorily discriminate between mortality and unfavorable outcomes. However, only the TRISS and IMPACT models showed accurate calibration when predicting 6-month unfavorable outcome.

Severe traumatic brain injury and acute kidney injury patients: factors associated with in-hospital mortality and unfavorable outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to identify the occurrence of AKI, and factors associated with in-hospital mortality and unfavorable outcomes in patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) and acute kidney injury (AKI) severity. METHOD: A retrospective cohort study which analyzed data with severe TBI between 2013 and 2017. We examined demographic and clinical information, and outcome by in-hospital mortality, and the Glasgow Outcome Scale six months after TBI. We associated factors to in-hospital mortality and unfavorable outcome in severe TBI and AKI with an association test. RESULTS: A total of 219 patients were selected, 39.3% had an AKI, and several factors associated with AKI occurrence after severe TBI. Stage 2 or 3 of AKI (OR 12.489; 95% CI = 4.45-37.94) were independent risk for both outcomes in multivariable models, severity injury by the New Trauma Injury Severity Score (OR 0.97; 95% CI = 0.96-0.99) for mortality, and the New Injury Severity Score (OR1.07; 95% CI = 1.04-1.10) and Trauma and Injury Severity Score (OR = 0.98; 95% CI = 0.965-0.997) for unfavorable outcome. CONCLUSION: The findings of our study confirmed that AKI severity and severity of injury was also related to increased mortality and unfavorable outcome after severe TBI.

Prognostic Models in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

This review aimed to analyze the results of investigations that performed external validation or that compared prognostic models to identify the models and their variations that showed the best performance in predicting mortality, survival, and unfavorable outcome after severe traumatic brain injury. Pubmed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Google Scholar, TROVE, and Open Grey databases were searched. A total of 1616 studies were identified and screened, and 15 studies were subsequently included for analysis after applying the selection criteria. The Corticosteroid Randomization After Significant Head Injury (CRASH) and International Mission for Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials in Traumatic Brain Injury (IMPACT) models were the most externally validated among studies of severe traumatic brain injury. The results of the review showed that most publications encountered an area under the curve ≥ 0.70. The area under the curve meta-analysis showed similarity between the CRASH and IMPACT models and their variations for predicting mortality and unfavorable outcomes. Calibration results showed that the variations of CRASH and IMPACT models demonstrated adequate calibration in most studies for both outcomes, but without a clear indication of uncertainties in the evaluations of these models. Based on the results of this meta-analysis, the choice of prognostic models for clinical application may depend on the availability of predictors, characteristics of the population, and trauma care services.