• 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

相似文献

1
Accuracy of head computed tomography scoring systems in predicting outcomes for patients with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury: A ProTECT III ancillary study.头部计算机断层扫描评分系统对中重度创伤性脑损伤患者结局预测的准确性:一项 PROTECT III 辅助研究。
Neuroradiol J. 2023 Feb;36(1):38-48. doi: 10.1177/19714009221101313. Epub 2022 May 9.
2
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.
3
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.
4
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.
5
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.
6
Utility of the Marshall & Rotterdam Classification Scores in Predicting Outcomes in Trauma Patients.马歇尔和鹿特丹分类评分在预测创伤患者结局中的应用。
J Surg Res. 2021 Aug;264:194-198. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2021.02.025. Epub 2021 Apr 7.
7
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.
8
Neuroimaging Radiological Interpretation System for Acute Traumatic Brain Injury.神经影像学放射性损伤解读系统在急性创伤性脑损伤中的应用。
J Neurotrauma. 2018 Nov 15;35(22):2665-2672. doi: 10.1089/neu.2017.5311. Epub 2018 Jul 23.
9
Prediction of In-Hospital Outcomes in Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury Using Computed Tomographic Scoring Systems: A Comparison Between Marshall, Rotterdam, and Neuroimaging Radiological Interpretation Systems.应用 CT 评分系统预测创伤性脑损伤患者的院内转归:Marshall、 Rotterdam 和神经影像学放射学解读系统的比较。
World Neurosurg. 2023 Jul;175:e271-e277. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2023.03.067. Epub 2023 Mar 21.
10
Validation of the NeuroImaging Radiological Interpretation System for Acute Traumatic Brain Injury.急性创伤性脑损伤神经影像放射学解释系统的验证
J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2019 Sep/Oct;43(5):690-696. doi: 10.1097/RCT.0000000000000913.

引用本文的文献

1
Relationship between extravascular leakage and clinical outcome on computed tomography of isolated traumatic brain injury.孤立性创伤性脑损伤计算机断层扫描血管外渗漏与临床结局的关系
Acute Med Surg. 2024 Feb 20;11(1):e931. doi: 10.1002/ams2.931. eCollection 2024 Jan-Dec.
2
Long-Term Functional Outcome and Quality of Life in Long-Term Traumatic Brain Injury Survivors.长期创伤性脑损伤幸存者的长期功能结局和生活质量
Neurotrauma Rep. 2023 Nov 22;4(1):813-822. doi: 10.1089/neur.2023.0064. eCollection 2023.

本文引用的文献

1
Validation of the NeuroImaging Radiological Interpretation System for Acute Traumatic Brain Injury.急性创伤性脑损伤神经影像放射学解释系统的验证
J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2019 Sep/Oct;43(5):690-696. doi: 10.1097/RCT.0000000000000913.
2
Association of Very Early Serum Levels of S100B, Glial Fibrillary Acidic Protein, Ubiquitin C-Terminal Hydrolase-L1, and Spectrin Breakdown Product with Outcome in ProTECT III.S100B、胶质纤维酸性蛋白、泛素羧基末端水解酶-L1 和血影蛋白断裂产物的非常早期血清水平与 PROTECT III 结局的关系。
J Neurotrauma. 2019 Oct 15;36(20):2863-2871. doi: 10.1089/neu.2018.5809. Epub 2019 Jul 9.
3
Neuroimaging of Traumatic Brain Injury.创伤性脑损伤的神经影像学
Med Sci (Basel). 2018 Dec 20;7(1):2. doi: 10.3390/medsci7010002.
4
Neuroimaging Radiological Interpretation System for Acute Traumatic Brain Injury.神经影像学放射性损伤解读系统在急性创伤性脑损伤中的应用。
J Neurotrauma. 2018 Nov 15;35(22):2665-2672. doi: 10.1089/neu.2017.5311. Epub 2018 Jul 23.
5
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.
6
Prehospital Intubation is Associated with Favorable Outcomes and Lower Mortality in ProTECT III.在ProTECT III研究中,院外气管插管与良好预后及较低死亡率相关。
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2017 Sep-Oct;21(5):539-544. doi: 10.1080/10903127.2017.1315201. Epub 2017 May 10.
7
Accuracy of PECARN, CATCH, and CHALICE head injury decision rules in children: a prospective cohort study.PECARN、CATCH 和 CHALICE 头部损伤决策规则在儿童中的准确性:一项前瞻性队列研究。
Lancet. 2017 Jun 17;389(10087):2393-2402. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30555-X. Epub 2017 Apr 11.
8
Traumatic Brain Injury-Related Emergency Department Visits, Hospitalizations, and Deaths - United States, 2007 and 2013.2007年和2013年美国与创伤性脑损伤相关的急诊科就诊、住院及死亡情况
MMWR Surveill Summ. 2017 Mar 17;66(9):1-16. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.ss6609a1.
9
Common Data Elements in Radiology.放射学中的通用数据元素。
Radiology. 2017 Jun;283(3):837-844. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2016161553. Epub 2016 Nov 10.
10
ACR Appropriateness Criteria Head Trauma.美国放射学会(ACR)头部创伤适宜性标准
J Am Coll Radiol. 2016 Jun;13(6):668-79. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2016.02.023.

头部计算机断层扫描评分系统对中重度创伤性脑损伤患者结局预测的准确性:一项 PROTECT III 辅助研究。

Accuracy of head computed tomography scoring systems in predicting outcomes for patients with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury: A ProTECT III ancillary study.

机构信息

Department of Radiology, Neuroradiology Division, 6429Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Department of Radiology, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangdong, China.

出版信息

Neuroradiol J. 2023 Feb;36(1):38-48. doi: 10.1177/19714009221101313. Epub 2022 May 9.

DOI:10.1177/19714009221101313
PMID:35533263
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9893165/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Several types of head CT classification systems have been developed to prognosticate and stratify TBI patients.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of our study was to compare the predictive value and accuracy of the different CT scoring systems, including the Marshall, Rotterdam, Stockholm, Helsinki, and NIRIS systems, to inform specific patient management actions, using the ProTECT III population of patients with moderate to severe acute traumatic brain injury (TBI).

METHODS

We used the data collected in the patients with moderate to severe (GCS score of 4-12) TBI enrolled in the ProTECT III clinical trial. ProTECT III was a NIH-funded, prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial designed to determine the efficacy of early administration of IV progesterone. The CT scoring systems listed above were applied to the baseline CT scans obtained in the trial. We assessed the predictive accuracy of these scoring systems with respect to Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended at 6 months, disability rating scale score, and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 882 subjects were enrolled in ProTECT III. Worse scores for each head CT scoring systems were highly correlated with unfavorable outcome, disability outcome, and mortality. The NIRIS classification was more strongly correlated than the Stockholm and Rotterdam CT scores, followed by the Helsinki and Marshall CT classification. The highest correlation was observed between NIRIS and mortality (estimated odds ratios of 4.83).

CONCLUSION

All scores were highly associated with 6-month unfavorable, disability and mortality outcomes. NIRIS was also accurate in predicting TBI patients' management and disposition.

摘要

背景

已经开发出几种类型的头部 CT 分类系统来预测和分层 TBI 患者。

目的

我们的研究目的是比较不同 CT 评分系统(包括 Marshall、Rotterdam、Stockholm、Helsinki 和 NIRIS 系统)的预测值和准确性,以告知特定的患者管理措施,使用 ProTECT III 中度至重度急性创伤性脑损伤(TBI)患者人群。

方法

我们使用了在中度至重度 TBI(GCS 评分为 4-12)患者中收集的 ProTECT III 临床试验数据。ProTECT III 是一项由 NIH 资助的前瞻性、多中心、随机、双盲、安慰剂对照临床试验,旨在确定早期给予 IV 孕酮的疗效。上述 CT 评分系统应用于试验中获得的基线 CT 扫描。我们评估了这些评分系统对 6 个月时格拉斯哥结局量表扩展、残疾评定量表评分和死亡率的预测准确性。

结果

共有 882 名受试者参加了 ProTECT III。每个头部 CT 评分系统的较差评分与不良结局、残疾结局和死亡率高度相关。NIRIS 分类与不良结局的相关性强于 Stockholm 和 Rotterdam CT 评分,其次是 Helsinki 和 Marshall CT 分类。NIRIS 与死亡率之间观察到的相关性最高(估计比值比为 4.83)。

结论

所有评分均与 6 个月时的不良结局、残疾和死亡率高度相关。NIRIS 也能准确预测 TBI 患者的管理和处置。