Ricardez-Cazares LG, González-Fernández MA, Dehesa-López E, Peraza-Garay F

Language: Spanish
References: 16
Page: 87-94
PDF size: 156.84 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objective: Determinate if the Rotterdam scale represents an significative improvement as an outcome predictor against the Marshall scales for TBI. Materials and methods: A transversal, observational, prospective. Study underwent in the radiology department of the “Hosital Civil de Culiacan” from January to December of 2017. With a simple size of 90 patients, to detect a difference in the AUC ROC of 0.13. in patients with mild to severe BHT which underwent head CT and were evaluated with. Both Rotterdam and Marshall scales. In order to compare the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) with the Rotterdam scale we use one-way ANOVA and Kruskall- Wallis test for the Marshall scale. Results: A total of 90 patients, 86.7% males and 13.3 females were recruited for this study. With a mean age of 34.3 years. The average for GCS upon arrival was 9.5 con with a mortality rate of 12.2%. Both scales show adequate discriminative power to predict outcomes from severe disability to early mortality. Without significative difference between Marshall (AUC 0.932) and Rotterdam (AUC 0.956). Conclusion: Both scales show adequate discriminative power to predict outcomes with respect to severe disability, vegetative state and death in patients with traumatic brain injury and can be use in clinical setting with confidence.

REFERENCES

1. Teasdale G, Maas A, Lecky F, Manley G,Stocchetti N, Murray G. The Glasgow ComaScale at 40 years: standing the test of time.Lancet Neurol.13(8):844-54.

2. Bordignon KC, Arruda WO. CT scan findingsin mild head trauma: a series of 2,000 patients.Arq Neuropsiquiatr. 2002;60(2-A):204-10.

3. Ontiveros A, Preciado A, Matute E, López M,López R. Factores pronósticos de recuperacióny reinserción laboral en adultos contraumatismo craneoencefálico. Rev MexNeuroci. 2014;15(4):211-217.

4. Saika A, Bansal S, Philip M, Devi BI, ShuklaDP. Prognostic value of FOUR and GCSscores in determining mortality in patientswith traumatic brain injury. Acta Neurochir.2015;157(8):1323-8.

5. Żyluk A. Indications for CT scanning in minorhead injuries: A review. Neurol NeurochirPol. 2015;49(1):52-7.

6. Mata-Mbemba D, Mugikura S, Nakagawa A.Early CT findings to predict early death in patientswith traumatic brain injury: Marshalland Rotterdam CT scoring systems comparedin the major academic tertiary care hospitalin northeastern Japan. Acad Radiol.2014;21 (5): 605-11

7. Jacobs B, Beems T, Stulemeijer M, vanVugt, A, van der Vliet, T, Borm G, & Vos P.Outcome prediction in mild traumatic braininjury: age and clinical variables are strongerpredictors than CT abnormalities. J Neurotrauma,27(4), 655-668.

8. Maas AIR, Hukkelhoven C, Marshall LF, SteyerbergEW Prediction of outcome in traumaticbrain injury with computed tomographiccharacteristics: a comparison betweenthe computed tomographic classificationand combinations of computed tomographicpredictors. Neurosurg. 201557(6):1173–1182

9. Bobinski L, Olivecrona M, Koskinen L-OD.Dynamics of brain tissue changes inducedby traumatic brain injury assessed with theMarshall, Morris–Marshall, and the Rotterdamclassifications and its impact on outcomein a prostacyclin placebo-controlledstudy. Acta Neurochir. 2012;154(6):1069-79.

10. Deepika A, Prabhuraj AR, Saikia A, ShuklaD. Comparison of predictability of Marshalland Rotterdam CT scan scoring system indetermining early mortality after traumaticbrain injury. Acta Neurochir (Wien).2015;157(11):2033-8.

11. Muakkassa FF, Marley RA, Paranjape C,Horattas E, Salvator A, Muakkassa K. Predictorsof New Findings on Repeat Head CTScan in Blunt Trauma Patients with an InitiallyNegative Head CT Scan. J Am CollSurg.214(6):965-72.

12. Thomas BW, Mejia VA, Maxwell RA, DartBW, Smith PW, Gallagher MR, et al. ScheduledRepeat CT Scanning for TraumaticBrain Injury Remains Important in AssessingHead Injury Progression. J Am CollSurg.210(5):824-30.

13. Chun KA, Manley GT, Stiver SI, Aiken AH,Phan N, Wang V, et al. Interobserver Variabilityin the Assessment of CT ImagingFeatures of Traumatic Brain Injury. J Neurotrauma.2010;27(2):325-30.

14. Forslund MV, Roe C, Sigurdardottir S, AndelicN. Predicting health-related quality of life2 years after moderate-to-severe traumaticbrain injury. Acta Neurol Scand.2013;128(4):220-7.

15. Oliveira RARA, Araújo S, Falcão ALE, SoaresSMTP, Kosour C, Dragosavac D, et al.Glasgow outcome scale at hospitaldischarge as a prognostic index in patientswith severe traumatic brain injury. Arq Neuropsiquiatr.2012; 70:604-8.

16. Settervall CHC, Sousa RMCd, Silva SCFe.In-hospital mortality and the Glasgow ComaScale in the first 72 hours after traumaticbrain injury. Rev Lat Am Enfermagem. 2011;19:1337-43.