Lammers Daniel, Conner Jeffrey, Marenco Chris, Morte Kaitlin, Martin Matthew, Eckert Matthew, Bingham Jason
Department of General Surgery, Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, Washington.
Department of General Surgery, Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, Washington.
J Surg Res. 2020 Nov;255:297-303. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2020.05.040. Epub 2020 Jun 22.
Prospective predictors of trauma-related outcomes have been validated to guide management in low-resource settings. The primary objective of this study was to determine the optimal prospective prediction method for mortality within combat and humanitarian trauma.
Retrospective review of the Department of Defense Trauma Registry from 2008 to 2016 was performed for adult patients. Areas under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) were calculated to assess the predictability of shock index (SI), reverse SI × Glasgow Coma Scale (rSIG), SI × Glasgow Coma Scale (SIG), Revised Trauma Score, and Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) on mortality at point of injury, arrival in emergency department (ED), and the difference in vital signs between those time points.
A total of 22,218 patients were included. Overall, 97.1% were male, median age range 25-29 y, Injury Severity Score 9.4 ± 0.07, with predominantly penetrating injuries (58.1%), and mortality of 3.4%. ED vitals yielded higher predictability of mortality for all tests based on higher AUROCs. TRISS and rSIG demonstrated the highest AUROCs (0.955 and 0.923, respectively). The optimal cutoff value for rSIG was 14.1 (sensitivity 89% and specificity 87%). rSIG values <14.1 were significantly associated with mortality (P < 0.01; odds ratio = 5.901).
Initial ED vital signs represented a better predictor of early mortality compared with point of injury vital signs for all predictive tools assessed. TRISS and rSIG proved to be most predictive of mortality. However, of the prospective tools assessed, rSIG may be optimal scoring tool because of its ease of calculation and its increased ability to predict mortality.
创伤相关结局的前瞻性预测指标已得到验证,可用于指导资源匮乏地区的治疗。本研究的主要目的是确定战斗和人道主义创伤中死亡率的最佳前瞻性预测方法。
对2008年至2016年美国国防部创伤登记处的成年患者进行回顾性研究。计算受试者操作特征曲线下面积(AUROC),以评估休克指数(SI)、反向SI×格拉斯哥昏迷量表(rSIG)、SI×格拉斯哥昏迷量表(SIG)、修订创伤评分和创伤与损伤严重程度评分(TRISS)对受伤时、到达急诊科(ED)时死亡率以及这些时间点之间生命体征差异的预测能力。
共纳入22218例患者。总体而言,97.1%为男性,年龄中位数范围为25 - 29岁,损伤严重程度评分为9.4±0.07,主要为穿透伤(58.1%),死亡率为3.4%。基于更高的AUROC,ED生命体征对所有测试的死亡率预测能力更高。TRISS和rSIG的AUROC最高(分别为0.955和0.923)。rSIG的最佳截断值为14.1(敏感性89%,特异性87%)。rSIG值<14.1与死亡率显著相关(P<0.01;比值比=5.901)。
对于所有评估的预测工具,初始ED生命体征比受伤时生命体征更能预测早期死亡率。TRISS和rSIG被证明对死亡率的预测性最强。然而,在所评估的前瞻性工具中,rSIG可能是最佳评分工具,因为它计算简便且预测死亡率的能力更强。