Lima GV, Rosas VLE, Sánchez GÓ

Language: Spanish
References: 18
Page: 83-87
PDF size: 58.05 Kb.

ABSTRACT

The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) is widely used to evaluate patients with head trauma. Despite being limited in patients where the verbal component can not be evaluated, a low mark in the GCS has prognostic implications for the patient. The same mark in the GCS might be composed by different values of its components, which means that there might be patients with the same mark and different prognosis. One must remember that although there are 120 theoretical possible combinations, some of these combinations are anatomically and physiologically incongruous. In each component of the GCs the higher value represents a cortical function, and as the marks decrease, diverse caudal functions of the neural axis are represented. An anatomic correlation of the components of the GCS is proposed, which could allow the confirmation of the mark, according to the level of injury, on the other hand, this correlation could also allow detecting the need of re-evaluation, in case the marks of the components were not anatomically and physiologically congruous.

REFERENCES

1. Thurman D, Guerrero J. Trends in hospitalization associated with traumatic brain injury. JAMA 1999; 282: 954-957.

2. Masson F, Thicoipe M, Aye P, Mokni T, Senjean P, Schmitt V, Dessalles PH, Cazaugade M, Labadens P. Prospective Population-Based Study. J Trauma 2001; 51: 481-489.

3. Teasdale G, Jennett B. Assessment of coma and impaired consciousness: A practical scale. Lancet 1974; 2: 81.

4. Teasdale G, Jennet B. Assessment and prognosis of coma after head injury. Acta Neurochirugica 1976; 34: 45-55.

5. Colegio Americano de Cirujanos. Programa de apoyo vital avanzado en trauma. 6ª ed, Chicago, American College of Surgeons. Committee on Trauma. 1997.

6. Mattox KL, Feliciano DV, Moore EE. Trauma. 4ª ed, México, McGraw-Hill; 2001.

7. Simpson DA. Clinical examination and grading. In: Reilly P, Bullock L: Head Injury. London, Chapman and Hall; 1997: 149.

8. Marik P, Varon J, Trask T. Management of Head Trauma. Chest 2002; 122: 699-711.

9. Norwood SH, McAuley CE, Berne JD, Vallina VL, Creath RG, McLarty J. A prehospital Glasgow Coma scale score < 14 accurately predicts the need for full trauma team activation and patient hospitalization after motor vehicle collisions. J Trauma 2002; 53: 503-507.

10. Schreiber MA, Aoki N, Scott BG, Beck JR. Determinants of mortality in patients with severe blunt head injury. Arch Surg 2002; 137: 185-290.

11. Healey C, Osler TM, Rogers FB, Healey MA, Glance LG, Kilgo PD et al. Improving the Glasgow Coma Scale Score: Motor Score Alone Is a Better Predictor. J Trauma 2003; 54: 671-680.

12. Buechler CM, Blostein PA, Koestner A, Hurt K, Schaars M, McKernan J. Variation among Trauma Centers’ Calculation of Glasgow Coma Scale Score: Results of a National Survey. J Trauma 1998; 45: 429-432.

13. Rutledge R, Lentz CW, Fakhry S, Hunt J. Appropriate use of the Glasgow Coma Scale in Intubated Patients: A Linear Regression Prediction of the Glasgow Verbal Score from the Glasgow Eye and Motor Scores. J Trauma 1996; 41: 514-522.

14. Meredith W, Rutledge R, Fakhry SM, Emery S, Kromhout-Schiro S. The Conundrum of the Glasgow Coma Scale in Intubated Patients: A Linear Regression Prediction of the Glasgow Verbal Score from the Glasgow Eye and Motor Scores. J Trauma 1998; 44: 839-845.

15. Ross SE, Leipold C, Terregino C, O’Malley KF. Efficacy of the motor component of the Glasgow Coma Scale in trauma triage. J Trauma 1998; 45: 42-44.

16. Schaan M, Jaksche H, Boszczyk B. Predictors of Outcome in Head Injury: Proposal of a New Scaling System. J Trauma 2002; 52: 667-674.

17. Adams RD, Victor M, Ropper AH. Principles of Neurology. 6th ed., New York, McGraw-Hill; 1997.

18. Bullock, MR, Chesnut RM, Clifton GL et al. Management and prognosis of severe traumatic brain injury. Brain Trauma Foundation 2000.