Magnetic resonance imaging improves 3-month outcome prediction in mild traumatic brain injury

OBJECTIVE

To determine the clinical relevance, if any, of traumatic intracranial findings on early head computed tomography (CT) and brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to 3-month outcome in mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI).

METHODS

One hundred thirty-five MTBI patients evaluated for acute head injury in emergency departments of 3 LEVEL I trauma centers were enrolled prospectively. In addition to admission head CT, early brain MRI was performed 12 ± 3.9 days after injury. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were used to assess for demographic, clinical, socioeconomic, CT, and MRI features that were predictive of Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS-E) at 3 months postinjury.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven percent of MTBI patients with normal admission head CT had abnormal early brain MRI. CT evidence of subarachnoid hemorrhage was associated with a multivariate odds ratio of 3.5 (p = 0.01) for poorer 3-month outcome, after adjusting for demographic, clinical, and socioeconomic factors. One or more brain contusions on MRI, and ≥4 foci of hemorrhagic axonal injury on MRI, were each independently associated with poorer 3-month outcome, with multivariate odds ratios of 4.5 (p = 0.01) and 3.2 (p = 0.03), respectively, after adjusting for head CT findings and demographic, clinical, and socioeconomic factors.

INTERPRETATION

In this prospective multicenter observational study, the clinical relevance of abnormal findings on early brain imaging after MTBI is demonstrated. The addition of early CT and MRI markers to a prognostic model based on previously known demographic, clinical, and socioeconomic predictors resulted in a >2-fold increase in the explained variance in 3-month GOS-E.

Neuromonitoring in traumatic brain injury

Current approaches to monitoring in severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) include a wide array of modalities, providing insight into pressure parameters, oxygenation, perfusion, electrophysiology and metabolism of the brain. The intent of "multimodality monitoring" is to obtain a better understanding of what is going on within the brain of an individual patient in order to target treatment more appropriately. In this review we highlight the current status of neuromonitoring for TBI with a specific focus on how advanced analysis and integration of these parameters may be used to implement more personalized treatment approaches. In particular, combining information from different parameters and performing dynamic testing offers the potential to better understand the pathophysiological mechanisms active in the brain of a particular patient. Rather than persisting in a standardized "one size fits all" approach to therapy or continuing down the separate tracts of goal directed therapy, we suggest to think more in terms of "individualized therapeutic strategies" more focused on the specific requirements of each patient. Given the considerable data overload in multimodality monitoring and the complexity in interpretation of signals from multiple sources, specific attention needs to be directed to data processing and user-friendly displays. Intense collaboration and interaction between clinicians, basic researchers, IT-experts, nurses and industry will be required to further advance the fields towards more personalized approaches.

Predicting 14-day mortality after severe traumatic brain injury: application of the IMPACT models in the brain trauma foundation TBI-trac® New York State database

Prognostic models for outcome prediction in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) are important instruments in both clinical practice and research. To remain current a continuous process of model validation is necessary. We aimed to investigate the performance of the International Mission on Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials in TBI (IMPACT) prognostic models in predicting mortality in a contemporary New York State TBI registry developed and maintained by the Brain Trauma Foundation. The Brain Trauma Foundation (BTF) TBI-trac® database contains data on 3125 patients who sustained severe TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] score ≤ 8) in New York State between 2000 and 2009. The outcome measure was 14-day mortality. To predict 14-day mortality with admission data, we adapted the IMPACT Core and Extended models. Performance of the models was assessed by determining calibration (agreement between observed and predicted outcomes), and discrimination (separation of those patients who die from those who survive). Calibration was explored graphically with calibration plots. Discrimination was expressed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC). A total of 2513 out of 3125 patients in the BTF database met the inclusion criteria. The 14-day mortality rate was 23%. The models showed excellent calibration. Mean predicted probabilities were 20% for the Core model and 24% for the Extended model. Both models showed good discrimination with AUCs of 0.79 (Core) and 0.83 (Extended). We conclude that the IMPACT models validly predict 14-day mortality in the BTF database, confirming generalizability of these models for outcome prediction in TBI patients.

Does the extended Glasgow Outcome Scale add value to the conventional Glasgow Outcome Scale?

The Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) is firmly established as the primary outcome measure for use in Phase III trials of interventions in traumatic brain injury (TBI). However, the GOS has been criticized for its lack of sensitivity to detect small but clinically relevant changes in outcome. The Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE) potentially addresses this criticism, and in this study we estimate the efficiency gain associated with using the GOSE in place of the GOS in ordinal analysis of 6-month outcome. The study uses both simulation and the reanalysis of existing data from two completed TBI studies, one an observational cohort study and the other a randomized controlled trial. As expected, the results show that using an ordinal technique to analyze the GOS gives a substantial gain in efficiency relative to the conventional analysis, which collapses the GOS onto a binary scale (favorable versus unfavorable outcome). We also found that using the GOSE gave a modest but consistent increase in efficiency relative to the GOS in both studies, corresponding to a reduction in the required sample size of the order of 3-5%. We recommend that the GOSE be used in place of the GOS as the primary outcome measure in trials of TBI, with an appropriate ordinal approach being taken to the statistical analysis.

Re-orientation of clinical research in traumatic brain injury: report of an international workshop on comparative effectiveness research

During the National Neurotrauma Symposium 2010, the DG Research of the European Commission and the National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NIH/NINDS) organized a workshop on comparative effectiveness research (CER) in traumatic brain injury (TBI). This workshop reviewed existing approaches to improve outcomes of TBI patients. It had two main outcomes: First, it initiated a process of re-orientation of clinical research in TBI. Second, it provided ideas for a potential collaboration between the European Commission and the NIH/NINDS to stimulate research in TBI. Advances in provision of care for TBI patients have resulted from observational studies, guideline development, and meta-analyses of individual patient data. In contrast, randomized controlled trials have not led to any identifiable major advances. Rigorous protocols and tightly selected populations constrain generalizability. The workshop addressed additional research approaches, summarized the greatest unmet needs, and highlighted priorities for future research. The collection of high-quality clinical databases, associated with systems biology and CER, offers substantial opportunities. Systems biology aims to identify multiple factors contributing to a disease and addresses complex interactions. Effectiveness research aims to measure benefits and risks of systems of care and interventions in ordinary settings and broader populations. These approaches have great potential for TBI research. Although not new, they still need to be introduced to and accepted by TBI researchers as instruments for clinical research. As with therapeutic targets in individual patient management, so it is with research tools: one size does not fit all.

Rapid Ventricular Pacing for Flow Arrest During Cerebrovascular Surgery: Revival of an Old Concept

BACKGROUND:

Intraoperative rupture of a cerebral aneurysm can be a devastating event that increases operative morbidity and mortality. Rapid ventricular pacing (RVP) is a technique used in interventional cardiology to obtain flow arrest for short periods of time.

OBJECTIVE:

To present our experience using RVP for flow arrest during cerebrovascular surgery.

METHODS:

We used RVP to produce flow arrest for periods of 40 seconds in 12 patients who underwent craniotomy for a cerebrovascular disorder (11 aneurysms and 1 arteriovenous malformation).

RESULTS:

During RVP, there was an immediate and significant reduction of blood pressure in each patient. The maximum degree of hypotension was obtained 3.2 ± 0.7 seconds (mean ± SD) after the start of RVP. When RVP was terminated, normal sinus rhythm returned instantaneously, along with recovery of indexes of hemodynamic function. Subjectively, the decrease in blood pressures facilitated dissection, and during clipping, the aneurysm sac felt softer and was easier to manipulate. No complications related to RVP occurred.

CONCLUSION:

Rapid ventricular pacing during cerebrovascular surgery is an effective method for lowering the arterial blood pressure in a controlled and directly reversible manner. Advances in cardiology now make RVP a promising and safe technique that can facilitate complex cerebrovascular surgery.

Between-centre differences and treatment effects in randomized controlled trials: a case study in traumatic brain injury

Background

In Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), large between-centre differences in outcome exist and many clinicians believe that such differences influence estimation of the treatment effect in randomized controlled trial (RCTs). The aim of this study was to assess the influence of between-centre differences in outcome on the estimated treatment effect in a large RCT in TBI.

Methods

We used data from the MRC CRASH trial on the efficacy of corticosteroid infusion in patients with TBI. We analyzed the effect of the treatment on 14 day mortality with fixed effect logistic regression. Next we used random effects logistic regression with a random intercept to estimate the treatment effect taking into account between-centre differences in outcome. Between-centre differences in outcome were expressed with a 95% range of odds ratios (OR) for centres compared to the average, based on the variance of the random effects (tau²). A random effects logistic regression model with random slopes was used to allow the treatment effect to vary by centre. The variation in treatment effect between the centres was expressed in a 95% range of the estimated treatment ORs.

Results

In 9978 patients from 237 centres, 14-day mortality was 19.5%. Mortality was higher in the treatment group (OR = 1.22, p = 0.00010). Using a random effects model showed large between-centre differences in outcome (95% range of centre effects: 0.27- 3.71), but did not substantially change the estimated treatment effect (OR = 1.24, p = 0.00003). There was limited, although statistically significant, between-centre variation in the treatment effect (OR = 1.22, 95% treatment OR range: 1.17-1.26).

Conclusion

Large between-centre differences in outcome do not necessarily affect the estimated treatment effect in RCTs, in contrast to current beliefs in the clinical area of TBI.

Large between-center differences in outcome after moderate and severe traumatic brain injury in the international mission on prognosis and clinical trial design in traumatic brain injury (IMPACT) study

BACKGROUND

Differences between centers in patient outcome after traumatic brain injury are of importance for multicenter studies and have seldom been studied.

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the differences in centers enrolling patients in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and surveys.

METHODS

We analyzed individual patient data from 9578 patients with moderate and severe traumatic brain injury enrolled in 10 RCTs and 3 observational studies. We used random-effects logistic regression models to estimate the between-center differences in unfavorable outcome (dead, vegetative state, or severe disability measured with the Glasgow Outcome Scale) at 6 months adjusted for differences in patient characteristics. We calculated the difference in odds of unfavorable outcome between the centers at the higher end vs those at the lower end of the outcome distribution. We analyzed the total database, Europe and the United States separately, and 4 larger RCTs.

RESULTS

The 9578 patients were enrolled at 265 centers, and 4629 (48%) had an unfavorable outcome. After adjustment for patient characteristics, there was a 3.3-fold difference in the odds of unfavorable outcome between the centers at the lower end of the outcome distribution (2.5th percentile) vs those at the higher end of the outcome distribution (97.5th percentile; P<.001). In the 4 larger RCTs, the differences between centers were similar. However, differences were smaller between centers in the United States (2.4-fold) than between centers in Europe (3.8-fold).

CONCLUSION

Outcome after traumatic brain injury differs substantially between centers, particularly in Europe. Further research is needed to study explanations for these differences to suggest where quality of care might be improved.

Standardizing data collection in traumatic brain injury

Collaboration among investigators, centers, countries, and disciplines is essential to advancing the care for traumatic brain injury (TBI). It is thus important that we "speak the same language." Great variability, however, exists in data collection and coding of variables in TBI studies, confounding comparisons between and analysis across different studies. Randomized controlled trials can never address the many uncertainties concerning treatment approaches in TBI. Pooling data from different clinical studies and high-quality observational studies combined with comparative effectiveness research may provide excellent alternatives in a cost-efficient way. Standardization of data collection and coding is essential to this end. Common data elements (CDEs) are presented for demographics and clinical variables applicable across the broad spectrum of TBI. Most recommendations represent a consensus derived from clinical practice. Some recommendations concern novel approaches, for example assessment of the intensity of therapy in severely injured patients. Up to three levels of detail for coding data elements were developed: basic, intermediate, and advanced, with the greatest level of detail attained in the advanced version. More detailed codings can be collapsed into the basic version. Templates were produced to summarize coding formats, explanation of choices, and recommendations for procedures. Endorsement of the recommendations has been obtained from many authoritative organizations. The development of CDEs for TBI should be viewed as a continuing process; as more experience is gained, refinement and amendments will be required. This proposed process of standardization will facilitate comparative effectiveness research and encourage high-quality meta-analysis of individual patient data.

Microsurgical removal of Onyx HD-500 from an aneurysm for relief of brainstem compression. Case report

The authors report the successful removal of Onyx HD-500 from an aneurysm sac by means of ultrasonic aspiration. This 46-year-old woman presented with progressive spasms of her left arm and leg due to mass effect and compression on the right cerebral peduncle 5 years after endovascular treatment of an unruptured giant posterior communicating artery aneurysm with Onyx HD-500. No filling of the aneurysm was detected on angiography. The patient underwent a right pterional craniotomy and the aneurysm was opened to remove the Onyx mass. However, contrary to expectations, the aneurysm was still patent, filling with blood between the Onyx mass and the aneurysm wall. Under temporary clipping of the carotid artery, the Onyx mass within the aneurysm was removed in a piecemeal fashion using an ultrasonic aspirator and the aneurysm was then successfully clipped. The patient experienced significant improvement of the spasm after surgery. Angiography showed complete occlusion of the posterior communicating artery aneurysm. It is rarely necessary to remove embolization material such as Onyx HD-500, and little is known about the most appropriate surgical technique. This case report demonstrates that removal can be safely accomplished by means of ultrasonic aspiration.

The influence of enrollment criteria on recruitment and outcome distribution in traumatic brain injury studies: results from the impact study

Substantial heterogeneity exists among patients who suffer from traumatic brain injury (TBI). Strict enrollment criteria may diminish heterogeneity in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), but will also decrease recruitment and may affect the outcome distribution. The aim of this study was to investigate the influences of commonly used enrollment criteria for RCTs in TBI on potential recruitment and on outcome distribution. We used individual patient data from the International Mission on Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials in TBI (IMPACT) database, including six therapeutic phase III RCTs (n = 5816) and three surveys (n = 2217) in TBI. The primary outcome was the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) at 6 months after injury, which we dichotomized as favorable/unfavorable. We investigated the influences of commonly used enrollment criteria on recruitment and outcome distribution: time window between injury and admission to study hospital <or= 8 h; age at injury <or= 65 years; >or= 1 reactive pupil; motor score > 1; Glasgow Coma Scale <or= 8. Application of all enrollment criteria resulted in a large reduction of recruitment in both the surveys (up to 65%) and the RCTs (up to 41%). Among the remaining patients, fewer had an unfavorable outcome in both the surveys (original, 60%; remaining, 44%) and the RCTs (original, 43%; remaining, 38%). Applying these enrollment criteria to patients from the surveys resulted in an outcome distribution that approximated the outcome observed in the RCTs. The use of strict enrollment criteria leads to substantial reductions in the recruitment of RCTs in TBI. The outcome in TBI studies depends strongly on the enrollment criteria.

A simulation study evaluating approaches to the analysis of ordinal outcome data in randomized controlled trials in traumatic brain injury: results from the IMPACT Project

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials in traumatic brain injury have a disappointing track record, with a long history of 'negative' Phase III trials. One contributor to this lack of success is almost certainly the low efficiency of the conventional approach to the analysis, which discards information by dichotomizing an ordinal outcome scale.

PURPOSE

Our goal was to evaluate the potential efficiency gains, which can be achieved by using techniques, which extract additional information from ordinal outcome data - the proportional odds model and the sliding dichotomy. In addition, we evaluated the additional efficiency gains, which can be achieved through covariate adjustment.

METHODS

The study was based on simulations, which were built around a database of patient-level data extracted from eight Phase III trials and three observational studies in traumatic brain injury. Two different putative treatment effects were explored, one which followed the proportional odds model, and the other which assumed that the effect of the intervention was to reduce the risk of death without changing the distribution of outcomes within survivors. The results are expressed as efficiency gains, reported as the percentage reduction in sample size that can be used with the ordinal analyses without loss of statistical power relative to the conventional binary analysis.

RESULTS

The simulation results show substantial efficiency gains. Use of the sliding dichotomy allows sample sizes to be reduced by up to 40% without loss of statistical power. The proportional odds model gives modest additional gains over and above the gains achieved by use of the sliding dichotomy.

LIMITATIONS

As with any simulation study, it is difficult to know how far the findings may be extrapolated beyond the actual situations that were modeled.

CONCLUSIONS

Both ordinal techniques offer substantial efficiency gains relative to the conventional binary analysis. The choice between the two techniques involves subtle value judgments. In the situations examined, the proportional odds model gave efficiency gains over and above the sliding dichotomy, but arguably, the sliding dichotomy is more intuitive and clinically appealing.

Early prognosis in traumatic brain injury: from prophecies to predictions

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a heterogeneous condition that encompasses a broad spectrum of disorders. Outcome can be highly variable, particularly in more severely injured patients. Despite the association of many variables with outcome, prognostic predictions are notoriously difficult to make. Multivariable analysis has identified age, clinical severity, CT abnormalities, systemic insults (hypoxia and hypotension), and laboratory variables as relevant factors to include in models to predict outcome in individual patients. Advances in statistical modelling and the availability of large datasets have facilitated the development of prognostic models that have greater performance and generalisability. Two prediction models are currently available, both of which have been developed on large datasets with state-of-the-art methods, and offer new opportunities. We see great potential for their use in clinical practice, research, and policy making, as well as for assessment of the quality of health-care delivery. Continued development, refinement, and validation is advocated, together with assessment of the clinical impact of prediction models, including treatment response.

Imminent brain death: point of departure for potential heart-beating organ donor recognition

PURPOSE

There is, in European countries that conduct medical chart review of intensive care unit (ICU) deaths, no consensus on uniform criteria for defining a potential organ donor. Although the term is increasingly being used in recent literature, it is seldom defined in detail. We searched for criteria for determination of imminent brain death, which can be seen as a precursor for organ donation.

METHODS

We organized meetings with representatives from the field of clinical neurology, neurotraumatology, intensive care medicine, transplantation medicine, clinical intensive care ethics, and organ procurement management. During these meetings, all possible criteria were discussed to identify a patient with a reasonable probability to become brain dead (imminent brain death). We focused on the practical usefulness of two validated coma scales (Glasgow Coma Scale and the FOUR Score), brain stem reflexes and respiration to define imminent brain death. Further we discussed criteria to determine irreversibility and futility in acute neurological conditions.

RESULTS

A patient who fulfills the definition of imminent brain death is a mechanically ventilated deeply comatose patient, admitted to an ICU, with irreversible catastrophic brain damage of known origin. A condition of imminent brain death requires either a Glasgow Coma Score of 3 and the progressive absence of at least three out of six brain stem reflexes or a FOUR score of E(0)M(0)B(0)R(0).

CONCLUSION

The definition of imminent brain death can be used as a point of departure for potential heart-beating organ donor recognition on the intensive care unit or retrospective medical chart analysis.

Clinical trials in traumatic brain injury: past experience and current developments

In this article, we review past and current experience in clinical trials of traumatic brain injuries (TBIs), we discuss limitations and challenges, and we summarize current directions. The focus is on severe and moderate TBIs. A systematic literature search of the years from 1980 to 2009 revealed 27 large phase III trials in TBI; we were aware of a further 6 unpublished trials. Analysis of these 33 trials yielded interesting observations: There was a peak incidence of trial initiations that occurred in the mid-1990s with a sharp decline during the period from 2000 to 2004. Most trials that reported a significant treatment effect were studies on a therapeutic strategy (e.g., decompressive craniectomy, hypothermia), and these were single-center studies. Increasingly, studies have been shifting toward the Far East. The currently existing trial registries permit insight into ongoing or recently conducted trials. Compared with the past decade, the number of studies on neuroprotective agents taken forward into efficacy-oriented studies is low. In contrast, the number of studies on therapeutic strategies appears to be increasing again. The disappointing results in trials on neuroprotective agents in TBI have led to a critical reappraisal of clinical trial methodology. This has resulted in recommendations for preclinical workup and has triggered extensive analysis on approaches to improve the design and analysis of clinical trials in TBI. An interagency initiative toward standardization on selection and coding of data elements across the broad spectrum of TBI is ongoing, and will facilitate comparison of research findings across studies and encourage high-quality meta-analysis of individual patient data in the future.

IMPACT recommendations for improving the design and analysis of clinical trials in moderate to severe traumatic brain injury

Clinical trials in traumatic brain injury (TBI) pose complex methodological challenges, largely related to the heterogeneity of the population. The International Mission on Prognosis and Clinical Trial Design in TBI study group has explored approaches for dealing with this heterogeneity with the aim to optimize clinical trials in TBI. Extensive prognostic analyses and simulation studies were conducted on individual patient data from eight trials and three observational studies. Here, we integrate the results of these studies into the International Mission on Prognosis and Clinical Trial Design in TBI recommendations for design and analysis of trials in TBI: Details of the major baseline prognostic characteristics should be provided in every report on a TBI study; in trials they should be differentiated per treatment group. We also advocate the reporting of the baseline prognostic risk as determined by validated prognostic models. Inclusion criteria should be as broad as is compatible with the current understanding of the mechanisms of action of the intervention being evaluated. This will maximize recruitment rates and enhance the generalizability of the results. The statistical analysis should incorporate prespecified covariate adjustment to mitigate the effects of the heterogeneity. The statistical analysis should use an ordinal approach, based on either sliding dichotomy or proportional odds methodology. Broad inclusion criteria, prespecified covariate adjustment, and an ordinal analysis will promote an efficient trial, yielding gains in statistical efficiency of more than 40%. This corresponds to being able to detect a 7% treatment effect with the same number of patients needed to demonstrate a 10% difference with an unadjusted analysis based on the dichotomized Glasgow outcome scale.

Standardisation of data collection in traumatic brain injury: key to the future?

Great variability exists in data collection and coding of variables in studies on traumatic brain injury (TBI). This confounds comparison of results and analysis of data across studies. The difficulties in performing a meta-analysis of individual patient data were recently illustrated in the IMPACT project (International Mission on Prognosis and Clinical Trial Design in TBI): merging data from 11 studies involved over 10 person years of work. However, these studies did confirm the great potential for advancing the field by this approach. Although randomized controlled trials remain the prime approach for investigating treatment effects, these can never address the many uncertainties concerning multiple treatment modalities in TBI. Pooling data from different studies may provide the best possible source of evidence we can get in a cost efficient way. Standardisation of data collection and coding is essential to this purpose. Recommendations hereto have been proposed by an interagency initiative in the US. These proposals deserve to be taken forward at an international level. This initiative may well constitute one of the most important steps forwards, paving the road for harvesting successful results in the near future.

New approaches to increase statistical power in TBI trials: insights from the IMPACT study

INTRODUCTION

None of the multi-centre phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) performed in TBI have convincingly demonstrated efficacy. Problems in clinical trial design and analysis may have contributed to these failures. Clinical trials in the TBI population pose several complicated methodological challenges, related especially to the heterogeneity of the population. In this paper we examine the issue of heterogeneity within the IMPACT (International Mission on Prognosis and Clinical Trial design in TBI) database and investigate the application of conventional and innovative methods for the statistical analysis of trials in TBI.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Simulation studies in the IMPACT database (N = 9205) showed substantial gains in efficiency with covariate adjustment. Adjusting for 7 important predictors yielded up to a 28% potential reduction in trial size. Ongoing analyses on the potential benefit of ordinal analysis, such as proportional odds and sliding dichotomy, gave promising results with even larger potential reductions in trial size.

CONCLUSION

The statistical power of RCTs in TBI can be considerably increased by applying covariate adjustment and by ordinal analysis methods of the GOS. These methods need to be considered for optimizing future TBI trials.

Classification of traumatic brain injury for targeted therapies

The heterogeneity of traumatic brain injury (TBI) is considered one of the most significant barriers to finding effective therapeutic interventions. In October, 2007, the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, with support from the Brain Injury Association of America, the Defense and Veterans Brain Injury Center, and the National Institute of Disability and Rehabilitation Research, convened a workshop to outline the steps needed to develop a reliable, efficient and valid classification system for TBI that could be used to link specific patterns of brain and neurovascular injury with appropriate therapeutic interventions. Currently, the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) is the primary selection criterion for inclusion in most TBI clinical trials. While the GCS is extremely useful in the clinical management and prognosis of TBI, it does not provide specific information about the pathophysiologic mechanisms which are responsible for neurological deficits and targeted by interventions. On the premise that brain injuries with similar pathoanatomic features are likely to share common pathophysiologic mechanisms, participants proposed that a new, multidimensional classification system should be developed for TBI clinical trials. It was agreed that preclinical models were vital in establishing pathophysiologic mechanisms relevant to specific pathoanatomic types of TBI and verifying that a given therapeutic approach improves outcome in these targeted TBI types. In a clinical trial, patients with the targeted pathoanatomic injury type would be selected using an initial diagnostic entry criterion, including their severity of injury. Coexisting brain injury types would be identified and multivariate prognostic modeling used for refinement of inclusion/exclusion criteria and patient stratification. Outcome assessment would utilize endpoints relevant to the targeted injury type. Advantages and disadvantages of currently available diagnostic, monitoring, and assessment tools were discussed. Recommendations were made for enhancing the utility of available or emerging tools in order to facilitate implementation of a pathoanatomic classification approach for clinical trials.