The faster the better? Time to first CT scan after admission in moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury and its association with mortality

Development of a Quality Indicator Set for the Optimal Acute Management of Moderate to Severe Traumatic Brain Injury in the Australian Context

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to develop a consensus-based set of indicators of high-quality acute moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (msTBI) clinical management that can be used to measure structure, process, and outcome factors that are likely to influence patient outcomes. This is the first stage of the PRECISION-TBI program, which is a prospective cohort study that aims to identify and promote optimal clinical management of msTBI in Australia.

METHODS

A preliminary set of 45 quality indicators was developed based on available evidence. An advisory committee of established experts in the field refined the initial indicator set in terms of content coverage, proportional representation, contamination, and supporting evidence. The refined indicator set was then distributed to a wider Delphi panel for assessment of each indicator in terms of validity, measurement feasibility, variability, and action feasibility. Inclusion in the final indicator set was contingent on prespecified inclusion scoring.

RESULTS

The indicator set was structured according to the care pathway of msTBI and included prehospital, emergency department, neurosurgical, intensive care, and rehabilitation indicators. Measurement domains included structure indicators, logistic indicators, and clinical management indicators. The Delphi panel consisted of 44 participants (84% physician, 12% nursing, and 4% primary research) with a median of 15 years of practice. Of the 47 indicators included in the second round of the Delphi, 32 indicators were approved by the Delphi group.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified a set of 32 quality indicators that can be used to structure data collection to drive quality improvement in the clinical management of msTBI. They will also be used to guide feedback to PRECISION-TBI's participating sites.

Is time to first CT scan in patients with isolated severe traumatic brain injury prolonged when prehospital arterial cannulation is performed? A retrospective non-inferiority study

BACKGROUND

Invasive blood pressure measurement is the in-hospital gold standard to guide hemodynamic management and consecutively cerebral perfusion pressure in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Its prehospital use is controversial since it may delay further care. The primary aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that patients with severe traumatic brain injury who receive prehospital arterial cannulation, compared to those with in-hospital cannulation, do not have a prolonged time between on-scene arrival and first computed tomography (CT) of the head by more than ten minutes.

METHODS

This retrospective study included patients 18 years and older with isolated severe TBI and prehospital induction of emergency anaesthesia who received treatment in the resuscitation room of the University Hospital of Graz between January 1st, 2015, and December 31st, 2022. A Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to test for non-inferiority (margin = ten minutes) of the time interval between on-scene arrival and first head CT.

RESULTS

We included data of 181 patients in the final analysis. Prehospital arterial line insertion was performed in 87 patients (48%). Median (25-75th percentile) durations between on-scene arrival and first head CT were 73 (61-92) min for prehospital arterial cannulation and 75 (60-93) min for arterial cannulation in the resuscitation room. Prehospital arterial line insertion was significantly non-inferior within a margin of ten minutes with a median difference of 1 min (95% CI - 6 to 7, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

Time-interval between on-scene arrival and first head CT in patients with isolated severe traumatic brain injury who received prehospital arterial cannulation was not prolonged compared to those with in-hospital cannulation. This supports early out-of-hospital arterial cannulation performed by experienced providers.

Clinical Significance of the Control CT Rotterdam Score Compared With the Admission CT Rotterdam Score in Patients With Isolated Severe Traumatic Brain Injury in the Intensive Care Unit

BACKGROUND

The Rotterdam scale is one of the most commonly used radiological scales for evaluating and predicting outcomes in traumatic brain injury (TBI) cases. Given the evolving nature of TBI, our study is designed to compare the Rotterdam score of computed tomography (CT) findings upon admission (Rotterdam score I) with the score after 72 hours (Rotterdam score II) of treatment in the trauma intensive care unit (ICU).

METHODS

A retrospective observational study was conducted on 54 patients who received intensive care treatment for isolated severe TBI over five years. We included severe TBI patients with no age restrictions who required admission to the ICU within 12 hours of the onset of trauma. An initial Rotterdam CT score was obtained via a CT head scan within four hours of the trauma, followed by a control CT head scan 72 hours after ICU admission. It was essential to have documentation on the clinical and laboratory treatment course and access to radiological CT diagnostics. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were employed in this study to evaluate the accuracy of diagnostic tests, such as the Rotterdam score. The ROC curves provided a graphical representation of the tests' diagnostic performance, which helped assess their effectiveness.

RESULTS

There was a significant difference (p < 0.001) in the diagnostic scores of CT scans upon admission (Rotterdam score I) and control CT scans after 72 hours (Rotterdam score II) in the total sample. The Rotterdam score I was notably higher, 3.6 (±0.8), in patients requiring neurosurgical intervention compared to those who did not, 2.8 (±0.9), with significance (p = 0.003). The Rotterdam score I demonstrated a substantial predictive value for unfavorable outcomes (p = 0.048), as did the Rotterdam score II after the 72-hour mark (p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

The control Rotterdam score 72 hours after admission predicts mortality in isolated TBI patients more significantly than the Rotterdam score determined at the patient's admission to the intensive care unit.

Association between Time to Emergent Surgery and Outcomes in Trauma Patients: A 10-Year Multicenter Study

Background: Research on the impact of reduced time to emergent surgery in trauma patients has yielded inconsistent results. Therefore, this study investigated the relationship between waiting emergent surgery time (WEST) and outcomes in trauma patients. Methods: This retrospective, multicenter study used data from the Tzu Chi Hospital trauma database. The primary clinical outcomes were in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and prolonged hospital length of stay (LOS) of ≥30 days. Results: A total of 15,164 patients were analyzed. The median WEST was 444 min, with an interquartile range (IQR) of 248-848 min for all patients. Patients who died in the hospital had a shorter median WEST than did those who survived (240 vs. 446 min, p < 0.001). Among the trauma patients with a WEST of <2 h, the median time was 79 min (IQR = 50-100 min). No significant difference in WEST was observed between the survival and mortality groups for patients with a WEST of <120 min (median WEST: 85 vs. 78 min, p < 0.001). Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that WEST was not associated with an increased risk of in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.17-6.35 for 30 min ≤ WEST < 60 min; aOR = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.22-5.70 for 60 min ≤ WEST < 90 min; and aOR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.13-2.74 for WEST ≥ 90 min). Conclusions: Our findings do not support the "golden hour" concept because no association was identified between the time to definitive care and in-hospital mortality, ICU admission, and prolonged hospital stay of ≥30 days.

Early Pupillometry Assessment in Traumatic Brain Injury Patients: A Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the early assessment of neurological pupil index (NPi) values derived from automated pupillometry could predict neurological outcome after traumatic brain injury (TBI).

METHODS

Retrospective observational study including adult (>18 years) TBI patients admitted from January 2018 to December 2020, with available NPi on admission. Abnormal NPi was considered if <3. Unfavorable neurological outcome (UO) at hospital discharge was considered for a Glasgow Outcome Scale of 1-3.

RESULTS

100 patients were included over the study period (median age 48 (34-69) years and median GCS on admission 11 (6-15)); 49 (49%) patients had UO. On admission, 20 (20%) patients had an abnormal NPi (NPi < 3); median worst (i.e., from both eyes) NPi was 4.2 (3.2-4.5). Median worst and mean NPi on admission were significantly lower in the UO group than others (3.9 (1.7-4.4) vs. 4.4 (3.7-4.6); p = 0.005-4.0 (2.6-4.5) vs. 4.5 (3.9-4.7); p = 0.002, respectively). The ROC curve for the worst and mean NPi showed a moderate accuracy to predict UO (AUC 0.66 (0.56-0.77); p = 0.005 and 0.68 (0.57-0.78); p = 0.002). However, in a generalized linear model, the prognostic role of NPi on admission was limited.

CONCLUSIONS

Low NPi on admission has limited prognostic value in TBI.