• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

新型计算机断层扫描评分系统在人类创伤性脑损伤中的评估:一项观察性多中心研究。

Evaluation of novel computerized tomography scoring systems in human traumatic brain injury: An observational, multicenter study.

作者信息

Thelin Eric Peter, Nelson David W, Vehviläinen Juho, Nyström Harriet, Kivisaari Riku, Siironen Jari, Svensson Mikael, Skrifvars Markus B, Bellander Bo-Michael, Raj Rahul

机构信息

Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.

Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

出版信息

PLoS Med. 2017 Aug 3;14(8):e1002368. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002368. eCollection 2017 Aug.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pmed.1002368
PMID:28771476
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5542385/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a major contributor to morbidity and mortality. Computerized tomography (CT) scanning of the brain is essential for diagnostic screening of intracranial injuries in need of neurosurgical intervention, but may also provide information concerning patient prognosis and enable baseline risk stratification in clinical trials. Novel CT scoring systems have been developed to improve current prognostic models, including the Stockholm and Helsinki CT scores, but so far have not been extensively validated. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the Stockholm and Helsinki CT scores for predicting functional outcome, in comparison with the Rotterdam CT score and Marshall CT classification. The secondary aims were to assess which individual components of the CT scores best predict outcome and what additional prognostic value the CT scoring systems contribute to a clinical prognostic model.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

TBI patients requiring neuro-intensive care and not included in the initial creation of the Stockholm and Helsinki CT scoring systems were retrospectively included from prospectively collected data at the Karolinska University Hospital (n = 720 from 1 January 2005 to 31 December 2014) and Helsinki University Hospital (n = 395 from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2014), totaling 1,115 patients. The Marshall CT classification and the Rotterdam, Stockholm, and Helsinki CT scores were assessed using the admission CT scans. Known outcome predictors at admission were acquired (age, pupil responsiveness, admission Glasgow Coma Scale, glucose level, and hemoglobin level) and used in univariate, and multivariable, regression models to predict long-term functional outcome (dichotomizations of the Glasgow Outcome Scale [GOS]). In total, 478 patients (43%) had an unfavorable outcome (GOS 1-3). In the combined cohort, overall prognostic performance was more accurate for the Stockholm CT score (Nagelkerke's pseudo-R2 range 0.24-0.28) and the Helsinki CT score (0.18-0.22) than for the Rotterdam CT score (0.13-0.15) and Marshall CT classification (0.03-0.05). Moreover, the Stockholm and Helsinki CT scores added the most independent prognostic value in the presence of other known clinical outcome predictors in TBI (6% and 4%, respectively). The aggregate traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage (tSAH) component of the Stockholm CT score was the strongest predictor of unfavorable outcome. The main limitations were the retrospective nature of the study, missing patient information, and the varying follow-up time between the centers.

CONCLUSIONS

The Stockholm and Helsinki CT scores provide more information on the damage sustained, and give a more accurate outcome prediction, than earlier classification systems. The strong independent predictive value of tSAH may reflect an underrated component of TBI pathophysiology. A change to these newer CT scoring systems may be warranted.

摘要

背景

创伤性脑损伤(TBI)是导致发病和死亡的主要原因。脑部计算机断层扫描(CT)对于需要神经外科干预的颅内损伤的诊断筛查至关重要,但也可提供有关患者预后的信息,并有助于在临床试验中进行基线风险分层。已开发出新型CT评分系统以改进当前的预后模型,包括斯德哥尔摩CT评分和赫尔辛基CT评分,但迄今为止尚未得到广泛验证。本研究的主要目的是评估斯德哥尔摩CT评分和赫尔辛基CT评分对功能结局的预测能力,并与鹿特丹CT评分和马歇尔CT分级进行比较。次要目的是评估CT评分的哪些个体成分最能预测结局,以及CT评分系统对临床预后模型有何额外的预后价值。

方法与结果

从卡罗林斯卡大学医院(2005年1月1日至2014年12月31日,共720例)和赫尔辛基大学医院(2013年1月1日至2014年12月31日,共395例)前瞻性收集的数据中,回顾性纳入需要神经重症监护且未纳入斯德哥尔摩和赫尔辛基CT评分系统初始创建的TBI患者,共计1115例。使用入院时的CT扫描评估马歇尔CT分级以及鹿特丹、斯德哥尔摩和赫尔辛基CT评分。获取入院时已知的结局预测因素(年龄、瞳孔反应性、入院时格拉斯哥昏迷量表、血糖水平和血红蛋白水平),并将其用于单变量和多变量回归模型,以预测长期功能结局(格拉斯哥结局量表[GOS]的二分法)。共有478例患者(43%)预后不良(GOS 1 - 3)。在合并队列中,斯德哥尔摩CT评分(Nagelkerke伪R²范围为0.24 - 0.28)和赫尔辛基CT评分(0.18 - 0.22)的总体预后表现比鹿特丹CT评分(0.13 - 0.15)和马歇尔CT分级(0.03 - 0.05)更准确。此外,在存在其他已知的TBI临床结局预测因素时,斯德哥尔摩和赫尔辛基CT评分增加的独立预后价值最大(分别为6%和4%)。斯德哥尔摩CT评分中的创伤性蛛网膜下腔出血(tSAH)总成分是预后不良的最强预测因素。主要局限性在于研究的回顾性性质、患者信息缺失以及各中心随访时间不同。

结论

与早期分类系统相比,斯德哥尔摩和赫尔辛基CT评分能提供更多关于所受损伤的信息,并给出更准确的结局预测。tSAH的强大独立预测价值可能反映了TBI病理生理学中一个被低估的成分。可能有必要改用这些更新的CT评分系统。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f561/5542385/075c10579a24/pmed.1002368.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f561/5542385/35b3cc9b14e0/pmed.1002368.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f561/5542385/075c10579a24/pmed.1002368.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f561/5542385/35b3cc9b14e0/pmed.1002368.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f561/5542385/075c10579a24/pmed.1002368.g002.jpg

相似文献

1
Evaluation of novel computerized tomography scoring systems in human traumatic brain injury: An observational, multicenter study.新型计算机断层扫描评分系统在人类创伤性脑损伤中的评估:一项观察性多中心研究。
PLoS Med. 2017 Aug 3;14(8):e1002368. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002368. eCollection 2017 Aug.
2
Selection of CT variables and prognostic models for outcome prediction in patients with traumatic brain injury.创伤性脑损伤患者结局预测的CT变量及预后模型选择
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2021 Jul 17;29(1):94. doi: 10.1186/s13049-021-00901-6.
3
Comparison of the predictive value of the Helsinki, Rotterdam, and Stockholm CT scores in predicting 6-month outcomes in patients with blunt traumatic brain injuries.比较赫尔辛基、鹿特丹和斯德哥尔摩 CT 评分在预测钝性颅脑损伤患者 6 个月结局中的预测价值。
Chin J Traumatol. 2023 Nov;26(6):357-362. doi: 10.1016/j.cjtee.2023.04.002. Epub 2023 Apr 6.
4
Prognostic performance of computerized tomography scoring systems in civilian penetrating traumatic brain injury: an observational study.计算机断层扫描评分系统在民用穿透性颅脑损伤中的预后性能:一项观察性研究。
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2019 Dec;161(12):2467-2478. doi: 10.1007/s00701-019-04074-1. Epub 2019 Oct 28.
5
External validation of the NeuroImaging Radiological Interpretation System and Helsinki computed tomography score for mortality prediction in patients with traumatic brain injury treated in the intensive care unit: a Finnish intensive care consortium study.神经影像学放射学解释系统和赫尔辛基计算机断层扫描评分在重症监护病房治疗的创伤性脑损伤患者死亡率预测中的外部验证:芬兰重症监护联盟研究。
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2022 Oct;164(10):2709-2717. doi: 10.1007/s00701-022-05353-0. Epub 2022 Sep 1.
6
Comparative study of computed tomographic scoring systems and predictors of early mortality in severe traumatic brain injury.严重创伤性脑损伤中 CT 评分系统与早期死亡率预测因素的对比研究。
J Clin Neurosci. 2019 Aug;66:100-106. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2019.05.011. Epub 2019 May 15.
7
Predicting outcome in traumatic brain injury: development of a novel computerized tomography classification system (Helsinki computerized tomography score).预测创伤性脑损伤的预后:一种新型计算机断层扫描分类系统(赫尔辛基计算机断层扫描评分)的开发。
Neurosurgery. 2014 Dec;75(6):632-46; discussion 646-7. doi: 10.1227/NEU.0000000000000533.
8
Helsinki Computed Tomography Scoring System Can Independently Predict Long-Term Outcome in Traumatic Brain Injury.赫尔辛基计算机断层扫描评分系统能够独立预测创伤性脑损伤的长期预后。
World Neurosurg. 2017 May;101:528-533. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.02.072. Epub 2017 Feb 27.
9
Sequential changes in Rotterdam CT scores related to outcomes for patients with traumatic brain injury who undergo decompressive craniectomy.接受减压性颅骨切除术的创伤性脑损伤患者的鹿特丹CT评分与预后相关的序贯变化。
J Neurosurg. 2016 Jun;124(6):1640-5. doi: 10.3171/2015.4.JNS142760. Epub 2015 Oct 23.
10
Prognostic computed tomography Scores in traumatic brain injury.创伤性脑损伤的预后 CT 评分。
Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2020 Aug;195:105957. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2020.105957. Epub 2020 May 23.

引用本文的文献

1
Artificial intelligence in traumatic brain injury: Brain imaging analysis and outcome prediction: A mini review.创伤性脑损伤中的人工智能:脑成像分析与结果预测:一篇综述
World J Crit Care Med. 2025 Sep 9;14(3):107611. doi: 10.5492/wjccm.v14.i3.107611.
2
Deciphering the effectiveness of computed tomography scoring systems in improving mortality prediction for traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and bibliometric analysis.解读计算机断层扫描评分系统在改善创伤性脑损伤死亡率预测方面的有效性:一项系统评价和文献计量分析
J Trauma Inj. 2025 Jun;38(2):82-90. doi: 10.20408/jti.2025.0009. Epub 2025 Jun 25.
3
Influence of apolipoprotein E genotype on the proteomic profile in cerebral microdialysis after human severe traumatic brain injury: a prospective observational study.

本文引用的文献

1
Therapies negating neuroinflammation after brain trauma.脑外伤后抑制神经炎症的疗法。
Brain Res. 2016 Jun 1;1640(Pt A):36-56. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2015.12.024. Epub 2015 Dec 29.
2
Consensus statement from the 2014 International Microdialysis Forum.2014年国际微透析论坛共识声明。
Intensive Care Med. 2015 Sep;41(9):1517-28. doi: 10.1007/s00134-015-3930-y.
3
Temporal trends in surgical intervention for severe traumatic brain injury caused by extra-axial hemorrhage, 1995 to 2012.1995年至2012年期间,因轴外出血导致的严重创伤性脑损伤的手术干预的时间趋势。
载脂蛋白E基因型对人类重度创伤性脑损伤后脑微透析蛋白质组学图谱的影响:一项前瞻性观察研究。
Brain Commun. 2025 Mar 3;7(2):fcaf096. doi: 10.1093/braincomms/fcaf096. eCollection 2025.
4
Helsinki computed tomography score in predicting short- and long-term outcomes after primary decompressive craniectomy for traumatic brain injury.赫尔辛基计算机断层扫描评分在预测创伤性脑损伤初次减压性颅骨切除术后的短期和长期预后中的应用
Neurosurg Rev. 2025 Feb 21;48(1):258. doi: 10.1007/s10143-025-03410-7.
5
ASA score is an independent predictor of 1-year outcome after moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury.美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)评分是中重度创伤性脑损伤后1年预后的独立预测指标。
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2025 Feb 6;33(1):25. doi: 10.1186/s13049-025-01338-x.
6
Development and validation of a model to predict cognitive impairment in traumatic brain injury patients: a prospective observational study.预测创伤性脑损伤患者认知障碍模型的开发与验证:一项前瞻性观察研究。
EClinicalMedicine. 2025 Jan 2;80:103023. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.103023. eCollection 2025 Feb.
7
Assessing outcomes in traumatic brain injury: Helsinki score versus Glasgow coma scale.创伤性脑损伤结局评估:赫尔辛基评分与格拉斯哥昏迷评分。
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2024 Oct;50(5):2491-2499. doi: 10.1007/s00068-024-02604-w. Epub 2024 Jul 25.
8
Development and validation of a nomogram for predicting mortality in patients with acute severe traumatic brain injury: A retrospective analysis.开发并验证预测急性严重创伤性脑损伤患者死亡率的列线图:一项回顾性分析。
Neurol Sci. 2024 Oct;45(10):4931-4956. doi: 10.1007/s10072-024-07572-y. Epub 2024 May 9.
9
Predictors of outcomes 3 to 12 months after traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.创伤性脑损伤后3至12个月预后的预测因素:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。
Osong Public Health Res Perspect. 2024 Feb;15(1):3-17. doi: 10.24171/j.phrp.2023.0288. Epub 2024 Feb 5.
10
Guidelines for Neuroprognostication in Critically Ill Adults with Moderate-Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.《成人中重度创伤性脑损伤神经预后指南》。
Neurocrit Care. 2024 Apr;40(2):448-476. doi: 10.1007/s12028-023-01902-2. Epub 2024 Feb 17.
Neurosurgery. 2015 Apr;76(4):451-60. doi: 10.1227/NEU.0000000000000693.
4
Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI): a prospective longitudinal observational study.欧洲创伤性脑损伤协作神经创伤有效性研究(CENTER-TBI):一项前瞻性纵向观察性研究。
Neurosurgery. 2015 Jan;76(1):67-80. doi: 10.1227/NEU.0000000000000575.
5
Glasgow Coma Scale Scoring is Often Inaccurate.格拉斯哥昏迷量表评分常常不准确。
Prehosp Disaster Med. 2015 Feb;30(1):46-53. doi: 10.1017/S1049023X14001289. Epub 2014 Dec 9.
6
Predicting outcome in traumatic brain injury: development of a novel computerized tomography classification system (Helsinki computerized tomography score).预测创伤性脑损伤的预后:一种新型计算机断层扫描分类系统(赫尔辛基计算机断层扫描评分)的开发。
Neurosurgery. 2014 Dec;75(6):632-46; discussion 646-7. doi: 10.1227/NEU.0000000000000533.
7
Observational studies: getting clear about transparency.观察性研究:明确透明度问题。
PLoS Med. 2014 Aug 26;11(8):e1001711. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001711. eCollection 2014 Aug.
8
Acute alcohol intoxication and long-term outcome in patients with traumatic brain injury.创伤性脑损伤患者的急性酒精中毒与长期预后
J Neurotrauma. 2015 Jan 15;32(2):95-100. doi: 10.1089/neu.2014.3488. Epub 2014 Nov 13.
9
The impact of time to surgery on outcomes in patients with traumatic brain injury: a literature review.手术时机对创伤性脑损伤患者预后的影响:一项文献综述。
Int Emerg Nurs. 2014 Oct;22(4):214-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ienj.2014.02.005. Epub 2014 Feb 27.
10
Evidence-based prehospital management of severe traumatic brain injury: a comparative analysis of current clinical practice guidelines.严重创伤性脑损伤的循证院前管理:当前临床实践指南的比较分析
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2014 Apr-Jun;18(2):265-73. doi: 10.3109/10903127.2013.856506. Epub 2014 Jan 8.