Occurrence and timing of withdrawal of life-sustaining measures in traumatic brain injury patients: a CENTER-TBI study

Performance of the ERC/ESICM-recommendations for neuroprognostication after cardiac arrest: Insights from a prospective multicenter cohort

AIM

To investigate the performance of the 2021 ERC/ESICM-recommended algorithm for predicting poor outcome after cardiac arrest (CA) and potential tools for predicting neurological recovery in patients with indeterminate outcome.

METHODS

Prospective, multicenter study on out-of-hospital CA survivors from 28 ICUs of the AfterROSC network. In patients comatose with a Glasgow Coma Scale motor score ≤3 at ≥72 h after resuscitation, we measured: (1) the accuracy of neurological examination, biomarkers (neuron-specific enolase, NSE), electrophysiology (EEG and SSEP) and neuroimaging (brain CT and MRI) for predicting poor outcome (modified Rankin scale score ≥4 at 90 days), and (2) the ability of low or decreasing NSE levels and benign EEG to predict good outcome in patients whose prognosis remained indeterminate.

RESULTS

Among 337 included patients, the ERC-ESICM algorithm predicted poor neurological outcome in 175 patients, and the positive predictive value for an unfavourable outcome was 100% [98-100]%. The specificity of individual predictors ranged from 90% for EEG to 100% for clinical examination and SSEP. Among the remaining 162 patients with indeterminate outcome, a combination of 2 favourable signs predicted good outcome with 99[96-100]% specificity and 23[11-38]% sensitivity.

CONCLUSION

All comatose resuscitated patients who fulfilled the ERC-ESICM criteria for poor outcome after CA had poor outcome at three months, even if a self-fulfilling prophecy cannot be completely excluded. In patients with indeterminate outcome (half of the population), favourable signs predicted neurological recovery, reducing prognostic uncertainty.

Predictive Models of Long-Term Outcome in Patients with Moderate to Severe Traumatic Brain Injury are Biased Toward Mortality Prediction

BACKGROUND

The prognostication of long-term functional outcomes remains challenging in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Our aim was to demonstrate that intensive care unit (ICU) variables are not efficient to predict 6-month functional outcome in survivors with moderate to severe TBI (msTBI) but are mostly associated with mortality, which leads to a mortality bias for models predicting a composite outcome of mortality and severe disability.

METHODS

We analyzed the data from the multicenter randomized controlled Continuous Hyperosmolar Therapy in Traumatic Brain-Injured Patients trial and developed predictive models using machine learning methods and baseline characteristics and predictors collected during ICU stay. We compared our models' predictions of 6-month binary Glasgow Outcome Scale extended (GOS-E) score in all patients with msTBI (unfavorable GOS-E 1-4 vs. favorable GOS-E 5-8) with mortality (GOS-E 1 vs. GOS-E 2-8) and binary functional outcome in survivors with msTBI (severe disability GOS-E 2-4 vs. moderate to no disability GOS-E 5-8). We investigated the link between ICU variables and long-term functional outcomes in survivors with msTBI using predictive modeling and factor analysis of mixed data and validated our hypotheses on the International Mission for Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials in TBI (IMPACT) model.

RESULTS

Based on data from 370 patients with msTBI and classically used ICU variables, the prediction of the 6-month outcome in survivors was inefficient (mean area under the receiver operating characteristic 0.52). Using factor analysis of mixed data graph, we demonstrated that high-variance ICU variables were not associated with outcome in survivors with msTBI (p = 0.15 for dimension 1, p = 0.53 for dimension 2) but mostly with mortality (p < 0.001 for dimension 1), leading to a mortality bias for models predicting a composite outcome of mortality and severe disability. We finally identified this mortality bias in the IMPACT model.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated using machine learning-based predictive models that classically used ICU variables are strongly associated with mortality but not with 6-month outcome in survivors with msTBI, leading to a mortality bias when predicting a composite outcome of mortality and severe disability.

Traumatic Brain Injury as an Independent Predictor of Futility in the Early Resuscitation of Patients in Hemorrhagic Shock

This review explores the concept of futility timeouts and the use of traumatic brain injury (TBI) as an independent predictor of the futility of resuscitation efforts in severely bleeding trauma patients. The national blood supply shortage has been exacerbated by the lingering influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the number of blood donors available, as well as by the adoption of balanced hemostatic resuscitation protocols (such as the increasing use of 1:1:1 packed red blood cells, plasma, and platelets) with and without early whole blood resuscitation. This has underscored the urgent need for reliable predictors of futile resuscitation (FR). As a result, clinical, radiologic, and laboratory bedside markers have emerged which can accurately predict FR in patients with severe trauma-induced hemorrhage, such as the Suspension of Transfusion and Other Procedures (STOP) criteria. However, the STOP criteria do not include markers for TBI severity or transfusion cut points despite these patients requiring large quantities of blood components in the STOP criteria validation cohort. Yet, guidelines for neuroprognosticating patients with TBI can require up to 72 h, which makes them less useful in the minutes and hours following initial presentation. We examine the impact of TBI on bleeding trauma patients, with a focus on those with coagulopathies associated with TBI. This review categorizes TBI into isolated TBI (iTBI), hemorrhagic isolated TBI (hiTBI), and polytraumatic TBI (ptTBI). Through an analysis of bedside parameters (such as the proposed STOP criteria), coagulation assays, markers for TBI severity, and transfusion cut points as markers of futilty, we suggest amendments to current guidelines and the development of more precise algorithms that incorporate prognostic indicators of severe TBI as an independent parameter for the early prediction of FR so as to optimize blood product allocation.

Prognostication in Neurocritical Care

OBJECTIVE

This article synthesizes the current literature on prognostication in neurocritical care, identifies existing challenges, and proposes future research directions to reduce variability and enhance scientific and patient-centered approaches to neuroprognostication.

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS

Patients with severe acute brain injury often lack the capacity to make their own medical decisions, leaving surrogate decision makers responsible for life-or-death choices. These decisions heavily rely on clinicians' prognostication, which is still considered an art because of the previous lack of specific guidelines. Consequently, there is significant variability in neuroprognostication practices. This article examines various aspects of neuroprognostication. It explores the cognitive approach to prognostication, highlights the use of statistical modeling such as Bayesian models and machine learning, emphasizes the importance of clinician-family communication during prognostic disclosures, and proposes shared decision making for more patient-centered care.

ESSENTIAL POINTS

This article identifies ongoing challenges in the field and emphasizes the need for future research to ameliorate variability in neuroprognostication. By focusing on scientific methodologies and patient-centered approaches, this research aims to provide guidance and tools that may enhance neuroprognostication in neurocritical care.

A National Survey on Coma Epidemiology, Evaluation, and Therapy in India: Revisiting the Curing Coma Campaign Come Together Survey

BACKGROUND

The limited representation from developing countries in the original COME TOGETHER survey gave us an impetus to conduct this survey in the Indian subcontinent.

METHODS

This cross-sectional online survey was conducted from August through September 2022. Participants were health care physicians caring for patients with coma and disorders of consciousness. Fischer's exact test or the Mann-Whitney U-test was used to compare respondents who agreed or disagreed with the preestablished coma definition. Fleiss κ values were calculated to assess agreement among respondents. A p value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 130 physicians. We found substantial interrater agreement on absence of wakefulness (71.54%; κ = 0.71), Glasgow Coma Score ≤ 8 (78.46%; κ = 0.78), and failure to respond purposefully to visual, verbal, or tactile stimuli (66.15%; κ = 0.66). Reported common etiologies of coma included traumatic brain injury (50.76%), ischemic stroke (30%), and intracerebral hemorrhage (29.23%). The most common clinical assessment tools used for coma included the Glasgow Coma Score (92.3%) and neurological examination (60.8%). Neurological examination was the most common diagnostic tool used (100%), followed by magnetic resonance imaging (89.2%), basic laboratory studies (88.5%), and head computed tomography/angiography (86.9%). Pharmacological interventions used to stimulate arousal in patients with coma were sedation vacation (91.5%), electrolyte/endocrine correction (65.4%), osmotic therapy with mannitol (60%), hypertonic saline (54.6%), modafinil (46.9%), and antidote for drugs (45.4%). Among the nonpharmacological interventions, sensory stimulation (57.7%) was the most commonly used modality. The most common discharge disposition for comatose patients who survived hospitalization were home with or without services (70.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Differences from the global survey were noted regarding the following: traumatic brain injury being the most common etiology of coma in India, more frequent practice of sedation interruption, less frequent use of electroencephalography in India, rare use of pharmacological neurostimulants, and home being the most common discharge disposition in India.

Recovery Potential in Patients Who Died After Withdrawal of Life-Sustaining Treatment: A TRACK-TBI Propensity Score Analysis

Among patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), there is high prognostic uncertainty but growing evidence that recovery of independence is possible. Nevertheless, families are often asked to make decisions about withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment (WLST) within days of injury. The range of potential outcomes for patients who died after WLST (WLST+) is unknown, posing a challenge for prognostic modeling and clinical counseling. We investigated the potential for survival and recovery of independence after acute TBI in patients who died after WLST. We used Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in TBI (TRACK-TBI) data and propensity score matching to pair participants with WLST+ to those with a similar probability of WLST (based on demographic and clinical characteristics), but for whom life-sustaining treatment was not withdrawn (WLST-). To optimize matching, we divided the WLST- cohort into tiers (Tier 1 = 0-11%, Tier 2 = 11-27%, Tier 3 = 27-70% WLST propensity). We estimated the level of recovery that could be expected in WLST+ participants by evaluating 3-, 6-, and 12-month Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE) and Disability Rating Scale outcomes in matched WLST- participants. Of 90 WLST+ participants (80% male, mean [standard deviation; SD] age = 59.2 [17.9] years, median [IQR] days to WLST = 5.4 [2.2, 11.7]), 80 could be matched to WLST- participants. Of 56 WLST- participants who were followed at 6 months, 31 (55%) died. Among survivors in the overall sample and survivors in Tiers 1 and 2, more than 30% recovered at least partial independence (GOSE ≥4). In Tier 3, recovery to GOSE ≥4 occurred at 12 months, but not 6 months, post-injury. These results suggest a substantial proportion of patients with TBI and WLST may have survived and achieved at least partial independence. However, death or severe disability is a common outcome when the probability of WLST is high. While further validation is needed, our findings support a more cautious clinical approach to WLST and more complete reporting on WLST in TBI studies.

Does frailty impact failure-to-rescue in geriatric trauma patients?

BACKGROUND

Failure-to-rescue (FTR), defined as death following a major complication, is a metric of trauma quality. The impact of patient frailty on FTR has not been fully investigated, especially in geriatric trauma patients. This study hypothesized that frailty increased the risk of FTR in geriatric patients with severe injury.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the TQIP database between 2015 and 2019, including geriatric patients with trauma (age ≥65 years) and an Injury Severity Score (ISS) > 15, who survived ≥48 hours postadmission. Frailty was assessed using the modified 5-item frailty index (mFI). Patients were categorized into frail (mFI ≥ 2) and nonfrail (mFI < 2) groups. Logistic regression analysis and a generalized additive model (GAM) were used to examine the association between FTR and patient frailty after controlling for age, sex, type of injury, trauma center level, ISS, and vital signs on admission.

RESULTS

Among 52,312 geriatric trauma patients, 34.6% were frail (mean mFI: frail: 2.3 vs. nonfrail: 0.9, p < 0.001). Frail patients were older (age, 77 vs. 74 years, p < 0.001), had a lower ISS (19 vs. 21, p < 0.001), and had a higher incidence of FTR compared with nonfrail patients (8.7% vs. 8.0%, p = 0.006). Logistic regression analysis revealed that frailty was an independent predictor of FTR (odds ratio, 1.32; confidence interval, 1.23-1.44; p < 0.001). The GAM plots showed a linear increase in FTR incidence with increasing mFI after adjusting for confounders.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that frailty independently contributes to an increased risk of FTR in geriatric trauma patients. The impact of patient frailty should be considered when using FTR to measure the quality of trauma care.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Guidelines for Neuroprognostication in Critically Ill Adults with Moderate-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury

BACKGROUND

Moderate-severe traumatic brain injury (msTBI) carries high morbidity and mortality worldwide. Accurate neuroprognostication is essential in guiding clinical decisions, including patient triage and transition to comfort measures. Here we provide recommendations regarding the reliability of major clinical predictors and prediction models commonly used in msTBI neuroprognostication, guiding clinicians in counseling surrogate decision-makers.

METHODS

Using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology, we conducted a systematic narrative review of the most clinically relevant predictors and prediction models cited in the literature. The review involved framing specific population/intervention/comparator/outcome/timing/setting (PICOTS) questions and employing stringent full-text screening criteria to examine the literature, focusing on four GRADE criteria: quality of evidence, desirability of outcomes, values and preferences, and resource use. Moreover, good practice recommendations addressing the key principles of neuroprognostication were drafted.

RESULTS

After screening 8125 articles, 41 met our eligibility criteria. Ten clinical variables and nine grading scales were selected. Many articles varied in defining "poor" functional outcomes. For consistency, we treated "poor" as "unfavorable". Although many clinical variables are associated with poor outcome in msTBI, only the presence of bilateral pupillary nonreactivity on admission, conditional on accurate assessment without confounding from medications or injuries, was deemed moderately reliable for counseling surrogates regarding 6-month functional outcomes or in-hospital mortality. In terms of prediction models, the Corticosteroid Randomization After Significant Head Injury (CRASH)-basic, CRASH-CT (CRASH-basic extended by computed tomography features), International Mission for Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials in TBI (IMPACT)-core, IMPACT-extended, and IMPACT-lab models were recommended as moderately reliable in predicting 14-day to 6-month mortality and functional outcomes at 6 months and beyond. When using "moderately reliable" predictors or prediction models, the clinician must acknowledge "substantial" uncertainty in the prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

These guidelines provide recommendations to clinicians on the formal reliability of individual predictors and prediction models of poor outcome when counseling surrogates of patients with msTBI and suggest broad principles of neuroprognostication.

Timing of withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy in traumatic brain injury: exploring indicators of poor prognosis in adult and geriatric populations

OBJECTIVE

The lack of objective prognostication tools for severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) causes variability in the application of withdrawal of life-saving treatment (WLST). We aimed to determine whether WLST in persons with severe TBI is associated with known indicators of poor prognosis.

METHODS

This retrospective descriptive study focused on adult (18-64 years) and geriatric (≥65 years) patients with severe TBI who were admitted between August 1, 2018 and July 31, 2021 at a Level I trauma center and subsequently underwent WLST. The data collected from the Trauma Registry and electronic health records included information regarding demographic characteristics, injury severity, clinical variables, and length of hospital stay and were used to examine the indicators of poor prognosis and WLST.

RESULTS

Among the 164 participants with TBI who met the inclusion criteria, 61.0% were geriatric, and 122 (74.4%) patients had 0 or only 1 of the poor prognostic indicators prior to WLST. The non-geriatric group had more indicators of poor prognosis than the geriatric group. Participants with fewer indicators of poor prognosis had a longer length-of-stay.

CONCLUSION

In severe TBI cases, standardized prognostication tools can help guide informed WLST decisions, particularly in geriatric patients, improving care consistency.

Prognostic Value of Frailty for Outcome Following Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Frailty is a known predictor of negative health outcomes. The role of frailty in predicting outcomes after traumatic brain injury (TBI), however, is unclear. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the association between frailty and adverse outcomes in patients with TBI. We identified relevant articles that investigated the relationship between frailty and outcomes in patients with TBI by searching PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, and EMBASE from inception until 23 March 2023. To evaluate the risk of bias in the included studies, we utilized the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). In addition, quantitative synthesis and meta-analyses were performed. We identified 12 studies that met our inclusion criteria; three were prospective. Of included studies, eight had low risk, three had moderate risk, and one had high risk of bias. Frailty was significantly associated with death in five studies, with an increased risk of in-hospital death and complications observed in frail patients. Frailty was associated with longer hospital stays and unfavorable outcome measured by the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE) in four studies. The meta-analysis found that higher frailty significantly increased the odds of non-routine discharge and unfavorable outcome as measured by GOSE scores of 4 or lower. The pooled odds ratio (OR) for non-routine discharge, was 1.80, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 1.15-2.84; and for unfavorable outcome, it was 1.91, with a 95% CI of 1.09-3.36. The analysis, however, did not find a significant predictive role for frailty on death (30-day or in-hospital death). The OR for higher frailty and death was 1.42 with a 95% CI of 0.92-2.19. Frailty should be considered in the evaluation of patients with TBI to identify those who may be at increased risk of negative outcomes.

Clinical outcomes and end-of-life treatment in 596 patients with isolated traumatic brain injury: a retrospective comparison of two Dutch level-I trauma centers

PURPOSE

With an increasingly older population and rise in incidence of traumatic brain injury (TBI), end-of-life decisions have become frequent. This study investigated the rate of withdrawal of life sustaining treatment (WLST) and compared treatment outcomes in patients with isolated TBI in two Dutch level-I trauma centers.

METHODS

From 2011 to 2016, a retrospective cohort study of patients aged ≥ 18 years with isolated moderate-to-severe TBI (Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) head ≥ 3) was conducted at the University Medical Center Rotterdam (UMC-R) and the University Medical Center Utrecht (UMC-U). Demographics, radiologic injury characteristics, clinical outcomes, and functional outcomes at 3-6 months post-discharge were collected.

RESULTS

The study population included 596 patients (UMC-R: n = 326; UMC-U: n = 270). There were no statistical differences in age, gender, mechanism of injury, and radiologic parameters between both institutes. UMC-R patients had a higher AIShead (UMC-R: 5 [4-5] vs. UMC-U: 4 [4-5], p < 0.001). There was no difference in the prehospital Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS). However, UMC-R patients had lower GCSs in the Emergency Department and used more prehospital sedation. Total in-hospital mortality was 29% (n = 170), of which 71% (n = 123) occurred after WLST. Two percent (n = 10) remained in unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (UWS) state during follow-up.

DISCUSSION

This study demonstrated a high WLST rate among deceased patients with isolated TBI. Demographics and outcomes were similar for both centers even though AIShead was significantly higher in UMC-R patients. Possibly, prehospital sedation might have influenced AIS coding. Few patients persisted in UWS. Further research is needed on WLST patients in a broader spectrum of ethics, culture, and complex medical profiles, as it is a growing practice in modern critical care.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Treatment-limiting decisions in patients with severe traumatic brain injury in the Netherlands

Introduction

Treatment-limiting decisions (TLDs) can be inevitable severe traumatic brain injury (s-TBI) patients, but data on their use remain scarce.

Research question

To investigate the prevalence, timing and considerations of TLDs in s-TBI patients.

Material and methods

s-TBI patients between 2008 and 2017 were analysed retrospecively. Patient data, timing, location, involvement of proxies, and reasons for TLDs were collected. Baseline characteristics and in-hospital outcomes were compared between s-TBI patients with and without TLDs.

Results

TLDs were reported in 117 of 270 s-TBI patients (43.3%) and 95.9% of deaths after s-TBI were preceded by a TLD. The majority of TLDs (68.4%) were categorized as withdrawal of therapy, of which withdrawal of organ-support in 64.1%. Neurosurgical intervention was withheld in 29.9%. The median time from admission to TLD was 2 days [IQR, 0-8] and 50.4% of TLDs were made within 3 days of admission. The main reason for a TLD was that the patients were perceived as unsalvageable (66.7%). Nearly all decisions were made multidisciplinary (99.1%) with proxies involvement (75.2%). The predicted mortality (CRASH-score) between patients with and without TLDs were 72.6 vs. 70.6%. The percentage of TLDs in s-TBI patients increased from 20.0% in 2008 to 42.9% in 2012 and 64.3% in 2017.

Discussion and conclusion

TLDs occurred in almost half of s-TBI patients and were instituted more frequently over time. Half of TLDs were made within 3 days of admission in spite of baseline prognosis between groups being similar. Future research should address whether prognostic nihilism contributes to self-fulfilling prophecies.

Prognosis and enhancement of recovery in disorders of consciousness

Disorders of consciousness after severe brain injury encompass conditions of coma, vegetative state/unresponsive wakefulness syndrome, and minimally conscious state. DoC clinical presentation pose perplexing challenges to medical professionals, researchers, and families alike. The outcome is uncertain in the first weeks to months after a brain injury, with families and medical providers often making important decisions that require certainty. Prognostication for individuals with these conditions has been the subject of intense scientific investigation that continues to strive for valid prognostic indicators and algorithms for predicting recovery of consciousness. This manuscript aims to provide an overview of the current clinical landscape surrounding prognosis and optimizing recovery in DoC and the current and future research that could improve prognostic accuracy after severe brain injury. Improved understanding of these factors will aid healthcare professionals in providing optimal care, fostering hope, and advocating for ethical practices in the management of individuals with DoC.

Examining the independent risk factors for withdrawal of life sustaining treatment in trauma patients

INTRODUCTION

Withdrawal of life sustaining treatment (WLST) occurs when medical intervention no longer benefits a patient's acute goals for care. The incidence of WLST in the trauma patient population is not well understood. The purpose of this study was to examine the incidence and independent risk factors associated with WLST.

METHODS

The Trauma Quality Improvement Program (2017-2018) was utilized. Patients arrived without signs of life or without mortality or WLST data were excluded. Demographics, injury data, and outcomes were analyzed. Categorical variables are presented as number (percentage) and continuous variables as median [interquartile range]. WLST and non-WLST patients were compared. Early (<24 h) WLST patients were compared to all other WLST patients.

RESULTS

Of 749,754 patients, 35,464 (4.7 %) died. Of these, 19,424 (2.6 %) died after WLST, constituting 54.8 % of all deaths. Median age was 67 [50-79], 67.6 % male, 17,557 (90.4 %) blunt injuries, 11,334 (58.4 %) GCS < 9. Median ISS 26 [17-30]. Median head AIS 4 (3-5). The WLST group had a much higher incidence of elderly (60+) patients (65.1% vs 41.0 %), blunt mechanism of injury (90.4% vs 76.9 %) and hypertension (43.5% vs 26.5 %). Black patients (8.2% vs 19.5 %) and Hispanic patients (7.9% vs 12.2 %) were less likely to undergo WLST. On multivariate analysis, patients 80+ years old (OR 12.939, p < 0.001), GCS < 9 (OR 15.621, p < 0.001), and head AIS = 5, head AIS = 6 (OR 3.886, p < 0.001 and OR 5.283, p < 0.001) were independently associated with WLST. GCS < 9 (OR 4.006, p < 0.001) and penetrating injury (OR 2.825, p < 0.001) were independently associated with early WLST within 24 h.

CONCLUSIONS

More than half who die from trauma undergo withdrawal of life sustaining treatment. Elderly patients and those with severe TBI and low GCS scores are at high risk of experiencing withdrawal of life sustaining treatment. Further prospective evaluation is warranted.

Early Shared Decision-Making for Older Adults with Traumatic Brain Injury: Using Time-Limited Trials and Understanding Their Limitations

Older adults account for a disproportionate share of the morbidity and mortality after traumatic brain injury (TBI). Predicting functional and cognitive outcomes for individual older adults after TBI is challenging in the acute phase of injury. Given that neurologic recovery is possible and uncertain, life-sustaining therapy may be pursued initially, even if for some, there is a risk of survival to an undesired level of disability or dependence. Experts recommend early conversations about goals of care after TBI, but evidence-based guidelines for these discussions or for the optimal method for communicating prognosis are limited. The time-limited trial (TLT) model may be an effective strategy for managing prognostic uncertainty after TBI. TLTs can provide a framework for early management: specific treatments or procedures are used for a defined period of time while monitoring for an agreed-upon outcome. Outcome measures, including signs of worsening and improvement, are defined at the outset of the trial. In this Viewpoint article, we discuss the use of TLTs for older adults with TBI, their potential benefits, and current challenges to their application. Three main barriers limit the implementation of TLTs in these scenarios: inadequate models for prognostication; cognitive biases faced by clinicians and surrogate decision-makers, which may contribute to prognostic discordance; and ambiguity regarding appropriate endpoints for the TLT. Further study is needed to understand clinician behaviors and surrogate preferences for prognostic communication and how to optimally integrate TLTs into the care of older adults with TBI.

Mining the contribution of intensive care clinical course to outcome after traumatic brain injury

Existing methods to characterise the evolving condition of traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) do not capture the context necessary for individualising treatment. Here, we integrate all heterogenous data stored in medical records (1166 pre-ICU and ICU variables) to model the individualised contribution of clinical course to 6-month functional outcome on the Glasgow Outcome Scale -Extended (GOSE). On a prospective cohort (n = 1550, 65 centres) of TBI patients, we train recurrent neural network models to map a token-embedded time series representation of all variables (including missing values) to an ordinal GOSE prognosis every 2 h. The full range of variables explains up to 52% (95% CI: 50-54%) of the ordinal variance in functional outcome. Up to 91% (95% CI: 90-91%) of this explanation is derived from pre-ICU and admission information (i.e., static variables). Information collected in the ICU (i.e., dynamic variables) increases explanation (by up to 5% [95% CI: 4-6%]), though not enough to counter poorer overall performance in longer-stay (>5.75 days) patients. Highest-contributing variables include physician-based prognoses, CT features, and markers of neurological function. Whilst static information currently accounts for the majority of functional outcome explanation after TBI, data-driven analysis highlights investigative avenues to improve the dynamic characterisation of longer-stay patients. Moreover, our modelling strategy proves useful for converting large patient records into interpretable time series with missing data integration and minimal processing.

Predictors and Temporal Trends of Withdrawal of Life-Sustaining Therapy After Acute Stroke in the Florida Stroke Registry

Temporal trends and factors associated with the withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy (WLST) after acute stroke are not well determined.

DESIGN

Observational study (2008-2021).

SETTING

Florida Stroke Registry (152 hospitals).

PATIENTS

Acute ischemic stroke (AIS), intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), and subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) patients.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Importance plots were performed to generate the most predictive factors of WLST. Area under the curve (AUC) for the receiver operating curve were generated for the performance of logistic regression (LR) and random forest (RF) models. Regression analysis was applied to evaluate temporal trends. Among 309,393 AIS patients, 47,485 ICH patients, and 16,694 SAH patients; 9%, 28%, and 19% subsequently had WLST. Patients who had WLST were older (77 vs 70 yr), more women (57% vs 49%), White (76% vs 67%), with greater stroke severity on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale greater than or equal to 5 (29% vs 19%), more likely hospitalized in comprehensive stroke centers (52% vs 44%), had Medicare insurance (53% vs 44%), and more likely to have impaired level of consciousness (38% vs 12%). Most predictors associated with the decision to WLST in AIS were age, stroke severity, region, insurance status, center type, race, and level of consciousness (RF AUC of 0.93 and LR AUC of 0.85). Predictors in ICH included age, impaired level of consciousness, region, race, insurance status, center type, and prestroke ambulation status (RF AUC of 0.76 and LR AUC of 0.71). Factors in SAH included age, impaired level of consciousness, region, insurance status, race, and stroke center type (RF AUC of 0.82 and LR AUC of 0.72). Despite a decrease in the rates of early WLST (< 2 d) and mortality, the overall rates of WLST remained stable.

CONCLUSIONS

In acute hospitalized stroke patients in Florida, factors other than brain injury alone contribute to the decision to WLST. Potential predictors not measured in this study include education, culture, faith and beliefs, and patient/family and physician preferences. The overall rates of WLST have not changed in the last 2 decades.

International variability in the diagnosis and management of disorders of consciousness

This manuscript explores the international variability in the diagnosis and management of disorders of consciousness (DoC). The identification, evaluation, intervention, exploration, prognostication and limitation of therapy for patients with DoC is reviewed through an international lens. The myriad factors that impact the diagnosis and management of DoC including 1) financial, 2) legal and regulatory, 3) cultural, 4) religious and 5) psychosocial considerations are discussed. As data comparing patients with DoC internationally are limited, findings from the general critical care or neurocritical care literature are described when information specific to patients with DoC is unavailable. There is a need for improvements in clinical care, education, advocacy and research related to patients with DoC worldwide. It is imperative to standardize methodology to evaluate consciousness and prognosticate outcome. Further, education is needed to 1) generate awareness of the impact of the aforementioned considerations on patients with DoC and 2) develop techniques to optimize communication about DoC with families. It is necessary to promote equity in access to expertise and resources for patients with DoC to enhance the care of patients with DoC worldwide. Improving understanding and management of patients with DoC requires harmonization of existing datasets, development of registries where none exist and establishment of international clinical trial networks that include patients in all phases along the spectrum of care. The work of international organizations like the Curing Coma Campaign can hopefully minimize international variability in the diagnosis and management of DoC and optimize care.

Acute traumatic coma awakening by right median nerve electrical stimulation: a randomised controlled trial

PURPOSE

Severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) leads to acute coma and may result in prolonged disorder of consciousness (pDOC). We aimed to determine whether right median nerve electrical stimulation is a safe and effective treatment for accelerating emergence from coma after TBI.

METHODS

This randomised controlled trial was performed in 22 centres in China. Participants with acute coma at 7-14 days after TBI were randomly assigned (1:1) to either routine therapy and right median nerve electrical stimulation (RMNS group) or routine treatment (control group). The RMNS group received 20 mA, 300 μs, 40 Hz stimulation pulses, lasting 20 s per minutes, 8 h per day, for 2 weeks. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who regained consciousness 6 months post-injury. The secondary endpoints were Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), Full Outline of Unresponsiveness scale (FOUR), Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R), Disability Rating Scale (DRS) and Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended (GOSE) scores reported as medians on day 28, 3 months and 6 months after injury, and GCS and FOUR scores on day 1 and day 7 during stimulation. Primary analyses were based on the intention-to-treat set.

RESULTS

Between March 26, 2016, and October 18, 2020, 329 participants were recruited, of whom 167 were randomised to the RMNS group and 162 to the control group. At 6 months post-injury, a higher proportion of patients in the RMNS group regained consciousness compared with the control group (72.5%, n = 121, 95% confidence interval (CI) 65.2-78.7% vs. 56.8%, n = 92, 95% CI 49.1-64.2%, p = 0.004). GOSE at 3 months and 6 months (5 [interquartile range (IQR) 3-7] vs. 4 [IQR 2-6], p = 0.002; 6 [IQR 3-7] vs. 4 [IQR 2-7], p = 0.0005) and FOUR at 28 days (15 [IQR 13-16] vs. 13 [interquartile range (IQR) 11-16], p = 0.002) were significantly increased in the RMNS group compared with the control group. Trajectory analysis showed that significantly more patients in the RMNS group had faster GCS, CRS-R and DRS improvement (p = 0.01, 0.004 and 0.04, respectively). Adverse events were similar in both groups. No serious adverse events were associated with the stimulation device.

CONCLUSION

Right median nerve electrical stimulation is a possible effective treatment for patients with acute traumatic coma, that will require validation in a confirmatory trial.

Development and first results of a national databank on care and treatment outcome after traumatic brain injury

PURPOSE

In absence of comprehensive data collection on traumatic brain injury (TBI), the German Society for Neurosurgery (DGNC) and the German Society for Trauma Surgery (DGU) developed a TBI databank for German-speaking countries.

METHODS

From 2016 to 2020, the TBI databank DGNC/DGU was implemented as a module of the TraumaRegister (TR) DGU and tested in a 15-month pilot phase. Since its official launch in 2021, patients from the TR-DGU (intermediate or intensive care unit admission via shock room) with TBI (AIS head ≥ 1) can be enrolled. A data set of > 300 clinical, imaging, and laboratory variables, harmonized with other international TBI data collection structures is documented, and the treatment outcome is evaluated after 6- and 12 months.

RESULTS

For this analysis, 318 patients in the TBI databank could be included (median age 58 years; 71% men). Falls were the most common cause of injury (55%), and antithrombotic medication was frequent (28%). Severe or moderate TBI were only present in 55% of patients, while 45% suffered a mild injury. Nevertheless, intracranial pathologies were present in 95% of brain imaging with traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhages (76%) being the most common. Intracranial surgeries were performed in 42% of cases. In-hospital mortality after TBI was 21% and surviving patients could be discharged after a median hospital stay of 11 days. At the 6-and 12 months follow-up, a favorable outcome was achieved by 70% and 90% of the participating TBI patients, respectively. Compared to a European cohort of 2138 TBI patients treated in the ICU between 2014 and 2017, patients in the TBI databank were already older, frailer, fell more commonly at home.

CONCLUSION

Within five years, the TBI databank DGNC/DGU of the TR-DGU could be established and is since then prospectively enrolling TBI patients in German-speaking countries. With its large and harmonized data set and a 12-month follow-up, the TBI databank is a unique project in Europe, already allowing comparisons to other data collection structures and indicating a demographic change towards older and frailer TBI patients in Germany.

Management of traumatic brain injury in the non-neurosurgical intensive care unit: a narrative review of current evidence

Each year, approximately 70 million people suffer traumatic brain injury, which has a significant physical, psychosocial and economic impact for patients and their families. It is recommended in the UK that all patients with traumatic brain injury and a Glasgow coma scale ≤ 8 should be transferred to a neurosurgical centre. However, many patients, especially those in whom neurosurgery is not required, are not treated in, nor transferred to, a neurosurgical centre. This review aims to provide clinicians who work in non-neurosurgical centres with a summary of contemporary studies relevant to the critical care management of patients with traumatic brain injury. A targeted literature review was undertaken that included guidelines, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, clinical trials and randomised controlled trials (published in English between 1 January 2017 and 1 July 2022). Studies involving key clinical management strategies published before this time, but which have not been updated or repeated, were also eligible for inclusion. Analysis of the topics identified during the review was then summarised. These included: fundamental critical care management approaches (including ventilation strategies, fluid management, seizure control and osmotherapy); use of processed electroencephalogram monitoring; non-invasive assessment of intracranial pressure; prognostication; and rehabilitation techniques. Through this process, we have formulated practical recommendations to guide clinical practice in non-specialist centres.

Withdrawal of Life-Sustaining Therapies in Children with Severe Traumatic Brain Injury

Neuroprognostication in severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) is challenging and occurs in critical care settings to determine withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies (WLST). However, formal pediatric sTBI neuroprognostication guidelines are lacking, brain death criteria vary, and dilemmas regarding WLST persist, which lead to institutional differences. We studied WLST practice and outcome in pediatric sTBI to provide insight into WLST-associated factors and survivor recovery trajectory ≥1 year post-sTBI. This retrospective, single center observational study included patients <18 years admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) of Erasmus MC-Sophia (a tertiary university hospital) between 2012 and 2020 with sTBI defined as a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) ≤8 and requiring intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring. Clinical, neuroimaging, and electroencephalogram data were reviewed. Multi-disciplinary follow-up included the Pediatric Cerebral Performance Category (PCPC) score, educational level, and commonly cited complaints. Seventy-eight children with sTBI were included (median age 10.5 years; interquartile range [IQR] 5.0-14.1; 56% male; 67% traffic-related accidents). Median ICP monitoring was 5 days (IQR 3-8), 19 (24%) underwent decompressive craniectomy. PICU mortality was 21% (16/78): clinical brain death (5/16), WLST due to poor neurological prognosis (WLST_neuro, 11/16). Significant differences (p < 0.001) between survivors and non-survivors: first GCS score, first pupillary reaction and first lactate, Injury Severity Score, pre-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and Rotterdam CT (computed tomography) score. WLST_neuro decision timing ranged from 0 to 31 days (median 2 days, IQR 0-5). WLST_neuro decision (n = 11) was based on neurologic examination (100%), brain imaging (100%) and refractory intracranial hypertension (5/11; 45%). WLST discussions were multi-disciplinary with 100% agreement. Immediate agreement between medical team and caregivers was 81%. The majority (42/62, 68%) of survivors were poor outcome (PCPC score 3 to 5) at PICU discharge, of which 12 (19%) in a vegetative state. One year post-injury, no patients were in a vegetative state and the median PCPC score had improved to 2 (IQR 2-3). No patients died after PICU discharge. Twenty percent of survivors could not attend school 2 years post-injury. Survivors requiring an adjusted educational level increased to 45% within this timeframe. Chronic complaints were headache, behavioral problems, and sleeping problems. In conclusion, two-thirds of sTBI PICU mortality was secondary to WLST_neuro and occurred early post-injury. Median survivor PCPC score improved from 4 to 2 with no vegetative patients 1 year post-sTBI. Our findings show the WLST decision process was multi-disciplinary and guided by specific clinical features at presentation, clinical course, and (serial) neurological diagnostic modalities, of which the testing combination was determined by case-to-case variation. This stresses the need for international guidelines to provide accurate neuroprognostication within an appropriate timeframe whereby overall survivor outcome data provides valuable context and guidance in the acute phase decision process.

Prognostic Models for Traumatic Brain Injury Have Good Discrimination but Poor Overall Model Performance for Predicting Mortality and Unfavorable Outcomes

BACKGROUND

The most extensively validated prognostic models for traumatic brain injury (TBI) are the Corticoid Randomization after Significant Head Injury (CRASH) and International Mission on Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials (IMPACT). Model characteristics outside of area under the curve (AUC) are rarely reported.

OBJECTIVE

To report the discriminative validity and overall model performance of the CRASH and IMPACT models for prognosticating death at 14 days (CRASH) and 6 months (IMPACT) and unfavorable outcomes at 6 months after TBI.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included prospectively collected patients with severe TBI treated at a single level I trauma center (n = 467). CRASH and IMPACT percent risk values for the given outcome were computed. Unfavorable outcome was defined as a Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended score of 1 to 4 at 6 months. Binary logistic regressions and receiver operating characteristic analyses were used to differentiate patients from the CRASH and IMPACT prognostic models.

RESULTS

All models had low R 2 values (0.17-0.23) with AUC values from 0.77 to 0.81 and overall accuracies ranging from 72.4% to 78.3%. Sensitivity (35.3-50.0) and positive predictive values (66.7-69.2) were poor in the CRASH models, while specificity (52.3-53.1) and negative predictive values (58.1-63.6) were poor in IMPACT models. All models had unacceptable false positive rates (20.8%-33.3%).

CONCLUSION

Our results were consistent with previous literature regarding discriminative validity (AUC = 0.77-0.81). However, accuracy and false positive rates of both the CRASH and IMPACT models were poor.

Factors associated with an unfavourable outcome in elderly intensive care traumatic brain injury patients. a retrospective multicentre study

BACKGROUND

Changes in the epidemiology of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in older patients have received attention, but limited data are available on the outcome of these patients after admission to intensive care units (ICUs). The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of patients over 65 years of age who were admitted to an ICU for TBI.

METHODS

This was a multicentre, retrospective, observational study conducted from January 2013 to February 2019 in the surgical ICUs of 5 level 1 trauma centres in France. Patients aged ≥ 65 years who were hospitalized in the ICU for TBI with or without extracranial injuries were included. The main objective was to determine the risk factors for unfavourable neurological outcome at 3 months defined as an Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE) score < 5.

RESULTS

Among the 349 intensive care patients analysed, the GOSE score at 3 months was ≤ 4 and ≥ 5 in 233 (67%) and 116 (33%) patients, respectively. The mortality rate at 3 months was 157/233 (67%), and only 7 patients (2%) fully recovered or had minor symptoms. Withdrawal or withholding of life-sustaining therapies in the ICU was identified in 140 patients (40.1%). Multivariate analysis showed that age (OR 1.09, CI 95% 1.04-1.14), male sex (OR 2.94, CI95% 1.70-5.11), baseline Glasgow Coma Scale score (OR 1.20, CI95% 1.13-1.29), injury severity score (ISS; OR 1.04, CI95% 1.02-1.06) and use of osmotherapy (OR 2.42, CI95% 1.26-4.65) were associated with unfavourable outcomes (AUC = 0.79, CI 95% [0.74-0.84]). According to multivariate analysis, the variables providing the best sensitivity and specificity were age ≥ 77 years, Glasgow Coma Scale score ≤ 9 and ISS ≥ 25 (AUC = 0.79, CI 95% [0.74-0.84]).

CONCLUSIONS

Among intensive care patients aged ≥ 65 years suffering from TBI, age (≥ 77 years), male sex, baseline Glasgow coma scale score (≤ 9), ISS (≥ 25) and use of osmotherapy were predictors of unfavourable neurological outcome.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04651803. Registered 03/12/2020. Retrospectively registered.

Traumatic Brain Injury in Different Age Groups

Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) is a global health burden [...].

Traumatic brain injury: progress and challenges in prevention, clinical care, and research

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) has the highest incidence of all common neurological disorders, and poses a substantial public health burden. TBI is increasingly documented not only as an acute condition but also as a chronic disease with long-term consequences, including an increased risk of late-onset neurodegeneration. The first Lancet Neurology Commission on TBI, published in 2017, called for a concerted effort to tackle the global health problem posed by TBI. Since then, funding agencies have supported research both in high-income countries (HICs) and in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). In November 2020, the World Health Assembly, the decision-making body of WHO, passed resolution WHA73.10 for global actions on epilepsy and other neurological disorders, and WHO launched the Decade for Action on Road Safety plan in 2021. New knowledge has been generated by large observational studies, including those conducted under the umbrella of the International Traumatic Brain Injury Research (InTBIR) initiative, established as a collaboration of funding agencies in 2011. InTBIR has also provided a huge stimulus to collaborative research in TBI and has facilitated participation of global partners. The return on investment has been high, but many needs of patients with TBI remain unaddressed. This update to the 2017 Commission presents advances and discusses persisting and new challenges in prevention, clinical care, and research.

In LMICs, the occurrence of TBI is driven by road traffic incidents, often involving vulnerable road users such as motorcyclists and pedestrians. In HICs, most TBI is caused by falls, particularly in older people (aged ≥65 years), who often have comorbidities. Risk factors such as frailty and alcohol misuse provide opportunities for targeted prevention actions. Little evidence exists to inform treatment of older patients, who have been commonly excluded from past clinical trials—consequently, appropriate evidence is urgently required. Although increasing age is associated with worse outcomes from TBI, age should not dictate limitations in therapy. However, patients injured by low-energy falls (who are mostly older people) are about 50% less likely to receive critical care or emergency interventions, compared with those injured by high-energy mechanisms, such as road traffic incidents.

Mild TBI, defined as a Glasgow Coma sum score of 13–15, comprises most of the TBI cases (over 90%) presenting to hospital. Around 50% of adult patients with mild TBI presenting to hospital do not recover to pre-TBI levels of health by 6 months after their injury. Fewer than 10% of patients discharged after presenting to an emergency department for TBI in Europe currently receive follow-up. Structured follow-up after mild TBI should be considered good practice, and urgent research is needed to identify which patients with mild TBI are at risk for incomplete recovery.

The selection of patients for CT is an important triage decision in mild TBI since it allows early identification of lesions that can trigger hospital admission or life-saving surgery. Current decision making for deciding on CT is inefficient, with 90–95% of scanned patients showing no intracranial injury but being subjected to radiation risks. InTBIR studies have shown that measurement of blood-based biomarkers adds value to previously proposed clinical decision rules, holding the potential to improve efficiency while reducing radiation exposure. Increased concentrations of biomarkers in the blood of patients with a normal presentation CT scan suggest structural brain damage, which is seen on MR scanning in up to 30% of patients with mild TBI. Advanced MRI, including diffusion tensor imaging and volumetric analyses, can identify additional injuries not detectable by visual inspection of standard clinical MR images. Thus, the absence of CT abnormalities does not exclude structural damage—an observation relevant to litigation procedures, to management of mild TBI, and when CT scans are insufficient to explain the severity of the clinical condition.

Although blood-based protein biomarkers have been shown to have important roles in the evaluation of TBI, most available assays are for research use only. To date, there is only one vendor of such assays with regulatory clearance in Europe and the USA with an indication to rule out the need for CT imaging for patients with suspected TBI. Regulatory clearance is provided for a combination of biomarkers, although evidence is accumulating that a single biomarker can perform as well as a combination. Additional biomarkers and more clinical-use platforms are on the horizon, but cross-platform harmonisation of results is needed. Health-care efficiency would benefit from diversity in providers.

In the intensive care setting, automated analysis of blood pressure and intracranial pressure with calculation of derived parameters can help individualise management of TBI. Interest in the identification of subgroups of patients who might benefit more from some specific therapeutic approaches than others represents a welcome shift towards precision medicine. Comparative-effectiveness research to identify best practice has delivered on expectations for providing evidence in support of best practices, both in adult and paediatric patients with TBI.

Progress has also been made in improving outcome assessment after TBI. Key instruments have been translated into up to 20 languages and linguistically validated, and are now internationally available for clinical and research use. TBI affects multiple domains of functioning, and outcomes are affected by personal characteristics and life-course events, consistent with a multifactorial bio-psycho-socio-ecological model of TBI, as presented in the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) 2022 report. Multidimensional assessment is desirable and might be best based on measurement of global functional impairment. More work is required to develop and implement recommendations for multidimensional assessment. Prediction of outcome is relevant to patients and their families, and can facilitate the benchmarking of quality of care. InTBIR studies have identified new building blocks (eg, blood biomarkers and quantitative CT analysis) to refine existing prognostic models. Further improvement in prognostication could come from MRI, genetics, and the integration of dynamic changes in patient status after presentation.

Neurotrauma researchers traditionally seek translation of their research findings through publications, clinical guidelines, and industry collaborations. However, to effectively impact clinical care and outcome, interactions are also needed with research funders, regulators, and policy makers, and partnership with patient organisations. Such interactions are increasingly taking place, with exemplars including interactions with the All Party Parliamentary Group on Acquired Brain Injury in the UK, the production of the NASEM report in the USA, and interactions with the US Food and Drug Administration. More interactions should be encouraged, and future discussions with regulators should include debates around consent from patients with acute mental incapacity and data sharing. Data sharing is strongly advocated by funding agencies. From January 2023, the US National Institutes of Health will require upload of research data into public repositories, but the EU requires data controllers to safeguard data security and privacy regulation. The tension between open data-sharing and adherence to privacy regulation could be resolved by cross-dataset analyses on federated platforms, with the data remaining at their original safe location. Tools already exist for conventional statistical analyses on federated platforms, however federated machine learning requires further development. Support for further development of federated platforms, and neuroinformatics more generally, should be a priority.

This update to the 2017 Commission presents new insights and challenges across a range of topics around TBI: epidemiology and prevention (section 1 ); system of care (section 2 ); clinical management (section 3 ); characterisation of TBI (section 4 ); outcome assessment (section 5 ); prognosis (Section 6 ); and new directions for acquiring and implementing evidence (section 7 ). Table 1 summarises key messages from this Commission and proposes recommendations for the way forward to advance research and clinical management of TBI.

The Characteristics of Withdrawal or Withholding of Life-Sustaining Treatment in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Single Japanese Institutional Study

OBJECTIVES

There is little evidence on the factors influencing the decision to withdraw or continue life-sustaining treatment in the setting of severe traumatic brain injury in Japanese institutions. We investigated the factors associated with the withdrawal or withholding of life-sustaining treatment (WLST) for severe traumatic brain injury at a single Japanese institution.

METHODS

A total of 161 patients with severe traumatic brain injury were retrospectively reviewed. Patient characteristics and injury types were compared between patients with and without the WLST.

RESULTS

Of the 161 patients, 87 (54%) died and 52 (32%) decided to undergo WLST. In 98% of the WLST cases, the decision was made within 24 h of admission. The mean duration between WLST and death was 2 days. The predicted probabilities for mortality and unfavorable outcomes were highest in patients with WLST within 24 h. Patients with WLST were older and had a higher frequency of falls on the ground, ischemic heart disease, and acute subdural hemorrhage than those without WLST.

CONCLUSIONS

The decisions of almost all WLST cases were made within 24 h of admission for severe traumatic brain injury in a Japanese institution because of Japanese patients' religious and cultural backgrounds.

The leap to ordinal: Detailed functional prognosis after traumatic brain injury with a flexible modelling approach

When a patient is admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) after a traumatic brain injury (TBI), an early prognosis is essential for baseline risk adjustment and shared decision making. TBI outcomes are commonly categorised by the Glasgow Outcome Scale–Extended (GOSE) into eight, ordered levels of functional recovery at 6 months after injury. Existing ICU prognostic models predict binary outcomes at a certain threshold of GOSE (e.g., prediction of survival [GOSE > 1]). We aimed to develop ordinal prediction models that concurrently predict probabilities of each GOSE score. From a prospective cohort (n = 1,550, 65 centres) in the ICU stratum of the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in TBI (CENTER-TBI) patient dataset, we extracted all clinical information within 24 hours of ICU admission (1,151 predictors) and 6-month GOSE scores. We analysed the effect of two design elements on ordinal model performance: (1) the baseline predictor set, ranging from a concise set of ten validated predictors to a token-embedded representation of all possible predictors, and (2) the modelling strategy, from ordinal logistic regression to multinomial deep learning. With repeated k-fold cross-validation, we found that expanding the baseline predictor set significantly improved ordinal prediction performance while increasing analytical complexity did not. Half of these gains could be achieved with the addition of eight high-impact predictors to the concise set. At best, ordinal models achieved 0.76 (95% CI: 0.74–0.77) ordinal discrimination ability (ordinal c-index) and 57% (95% CI: 54%– 60%) explanation of ordinal variation in 6-month GOSE (Somers’ D_xy). Model performance and the effect of expanding the predictor set decreased at higher GOSE thresholds, indicating the difficulty of predicting better functional outcomes shortly after ICU admission. Our results motivate the search for informative predictors that improve confidence in prognosis of higher GOSE and the development of ordinal dynamic prediction models.

Management of moderate to severe traumatic brain injury: an update for the intensivist

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) remains one of the most fatal and debilitating conditions in the world. Current clinical management in severe TBI patients is mainly concerned with reducing secondary insults and optimizing the balance between substrate delivery and consumption. Over the past decades, multimodality monitoring has become more widely available, and clinical management protocols have been published that recommend potential interventions to correct pathophysiological derangements. Even while evidence from randomized clinical trials is still lacking for many of the recommended interventions, these protocols and algorithms can be useful to define a clear standard of therapy where novel interventions can be added or be compared to. Over the past decade, more attention has been paid to holistic management, in which hemodynamic, respiratory, inflammatory or coagulation disturbances are detected and treated accordingly. Considerable variability with regards to the trajectories of recovery exists. Even while most of the recovery occurs in the first months after TBI, substantial changes may still occur in a later phase. Neuroprognostication is challenging in these patients, where a risk of self-fulfilling prophecies is a matter of concern. The present article provides a comprehensive and practical review of the current best practice in clinical management and long-term outcomes of moderate to severe TBI in adult patients admitted to the intensive care unit.