Gittins Adam, Talbott Nick, Gilani Ahmed A, Packer Greg, Browne Richard, Mullhi Randeep, Khan Zaheed, Whitehouse T, Belli Antonio, Mehta Rajnikant L, Gao-Smith Fang, Veenith Tonny
Division of Anaesthesia and Critical Care, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Department of Neurosurgery, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
J Intensive Care Soc. 2021 Aug;22(3):198-203. doi: 10.1177/1751143720946562. Epub 2020 Sep 3.
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Patients with poor-grade subarachnoid bleed (World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies grades 4-5) often improve their neurocognitive function months after their ictus. However, it is essential to explore the timing of intervention and its impact on long-term outcome. We compared the long-term outcomes between immediate management within 24 h and delayed management after 24 h in patients following poor-grade subarachnoid bleed.
This was a retrospective population-based study, including patients with poor-grade subarachnoid bleed who received definitive management between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2016 in a large tertiary neurocritical care unit. The primary outcome was adjusted odds ratio of favourable outcome (Glasgow Outcome Scale 4-5) for survivors at 12 months following discharge, as measured by the Glasgow Outcome Scale. The secondary outcomes included adjusted odds ratio of a favourable outcome at discharge, 3 months and 6 months following discharge and survival rate at 28 days, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months following haemorrhage.
A total of 111 patients were included in this study: 53 (48%) received immediate management and 58 (52%) received delayed management. The mean time delay from referral to intervention was 14.9 ± 5.8 h in immediate management patients, compared to 79.6 ± 106.1 h in delayed management patients. At 12 months following discharge, the adjusted odds ratio for favourable outcome in immediate management versus delayed management patients was 0.96 (confidence interval (CI) = 0.17, 5.39; = 0.961). At hospital discharge, 3 months and 6 months, the adjusted odds ratio for favourable outcome was 3.85 (CI = 1.38, 10.73; = 0.010), 1.04 (CI = 0.22, 5.00; = 0.956) and 0.98 (CI = 0.21, 4.58; = 0.982), respectively. There were no differences in survival rate between the groups at 28 days, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months (71.7% in immediate management group vs. 82.8% in delayed management group at 12 months, = 0.163).
Immediate management and delayed management after poor-grade subarachnoid bleed are associated with similar morbidity and mortality at 12 months. Therefore, delaying intervention in poor-grade patients may be a reasonable approach, especially if time is needed to plan the procedure or stabilise the patient adequately.
背景/目的:低级别蛛网膜下腔出血(世界神经外科协会联盟分级为4 - 5级)患者常在发病数月后神经认知功能得到改善。然而,探究干预时机及其对长期预后的影响至关重要。我们比较了低级别蛛网膜下腔出血患者在发病24小时内即刻治疗与24小时后延迟治疗的长期预后。
这是一项基于人群的回顾性研究,纳入了2011年1月1日至2016年12月31日期间在一家大型三级神经重症监护病房接受确定性治疗的低级别蛛网膜下腔出血患者。主要结局是出院后12个月时幸存者良好结局(格拉斯哥预后量表4 - 5级)的调整优势比,通过格拉斯哥预后量表进行测量。次要结局包括出院时、出院后3个月和6个月时良好结局的调整优势比,以及出血后28天、3个月、6个月和12个月时的生存率。
本研究共纳入111例患者:53例(48%)接受即刻治疗,58例(52%)接受延迟治疗。即刻治疗组患者从转诊到干预的平均时间延迟为14.9±5.8小时,而延迟治疗组为79.6±106.1小时。出院后12个月时,即刻治疗组与延迟治疗组患者良好结局的调整优势比为0.96(置信区间(CI)= 0.17, 5.39;P = 0.961)。出院时、3个月和6个月时,良好结局的调整优势比分别为3.85(CI = 1.38, 10.73;P = 0.010)、1.04(CI = 0.22, 5.00;P = 0.956)和0.98(CI = 0.21, 4.58;P = 0.982)。两组在28天、3个月、6个月和12个月时的生存率无差异(即刻治疗组12个月时为71.7%,延迟治疗组为82.8%,P = 0.163)。
低级别蛛网膜下腔出血后即刻治疗和延迟治疗在12个月时的发病率和死亡率相似。因此,延迟对低级别患者的干预可能是一种合理的方法,尤其是在需要时间来规划手术或充分稳定患者病情时。