Yu Nina, Castillo Jose, Kohler Jonathan E, Marcin James P, Nishijima Daniel K, Mo Jonathan, Kennedy Lori, Shahlaie Kiarash, Zwienenberg Marike
School of Medicine, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, California, USA.
Department of Neurological Surgery, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, California, USA.
J Neurotrauma. 2025 Jan;42(1-2):71-81. doi: 10.1089/neu.2024.0130. Epub 2024 Nov 7.
Children with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) and intracranial injury (ICI) often receive unnecessary imaging and hospital admission, leading to avoidable burdens on patients and health systems. While most of these patients do not develop critical neurological injuries, identifying those at risk would allow for a more optimal determination of the appropriate level of initial emergency care. The Brain Injury Guidelines (BIG) were developed as a triage tool to identify adult patients with mTBI and ICI who can benefit from repeat imaging, hospital admission, or neurosurgical consultation. Here, we sought to validate BIG in children at a Level I trauma center and determine if the BIG algorithm can accurately identify which patients with mTBI/ICI have critical neurosurgical injuries. We hypothesize that the BIG can identify critical neurological injuries more accurately than the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) alone and that more severe injury according to BIG is associated with worse patient outcome. We retrospectively reviewed TBI admissions at a single center (2017-2023) using an institutional registry. Patients included (0-17 years) had an initial head computerized tomography scan with ICI and a GCS of 14-15. Patients were retrospectively classified into the BIG categories (BIG 1, 2, or 3). Medical records were reviewed to identify clinically important TBI (ciTBI): death, neurological deterioration, neurosurgical intervention, intubation >24 h, or hospital admission >48 h due to TBI. Repeat imaging studies obtained were evaluated for progression of injury. The incidence of clinically important TBI (ciTBI) and imaging progression were recorded and compared across BIG categories. Outcomes were evaluated using the Glasgow Outcome Score Extended (GOS-E) 6 months after injury. Univariable and chi-square tests were used to analyze comparisons. Overall, 804 subjects were included in the analysis of which 551 (68.5%) were transfers. Overall, 175 (21.8%) patients had a BIG 1, 402 (50.0%) a BIG 2, and 227 (28.2%) a BIG 3 injury. CiTBI occurred among 64 (8.0%) patients overall, and in 1 (0.6%), 4 (1.0%), and 59 (26.0%) of the BIG 1, 2, and 3 injuries ( < 0.0001). Progression on repeat imaging associated with neurological decline, neurosurgical intervention or resulting in additional evaluation was noted in 0 (0%), 2 (0.5%), and 41 (18.0%) of the BIG 1, 2, and 3 injuries ( < 0.001). Amongst 471 patients (58.6%) with available 6-month patient outcomes, 98% had a GOS-E ≥5 and no outcome difference between BIG categories was observed. Risk stratification of mild TBI using BIG allowed for reasonable identification of children who subsequently develop ciTBI, suggesting that BIG classification can aid in triage and management of patients who might benefit from neurosurgical consultation, repeat imaging, and potentially transfer to a dedicated trauma center. More severe injury according to BIG was not associated with a worse patient outcome.
轻度创伤性脑损伤(mTBI)和颅内损伤(ICI)患儿常接受不必要的影像学检查和住院治疗,给患者和医疗系统带来了可避免的负担。虽然这些患者中的大多数不会发生严重的神经损伤,但识别出有风险的患者将有助于更优化地确定初始急诊护理的适当水平。脑损伤指南(BIG)是作为一种分诊工具而制定的,用于识别能从重复影像学检查、住院治疗或神经外科会诊中获益的患有mTBI和ICI的成年患者。在此,我们试图在一级创伤中心对儿童进行BIG验证,并确定BIG算法能否准确识别哪些患有mTBI/ICI的患者存在严重的神经外科损伤。我们假设BIG比单独使用格拉斯哥昏迷量表(GCS)能更准确地识别严重神经损伤,并且根据BIG判定的更严重损伤与更差的患者预后相关。我们使用机构登记册对单一中心(2017 - 2023年)的TBI住院患者进行了回顾性研究。纳入的患者(0 - 17岁)最初进行了头部计算机断层扫描且有ICI,格拉斯哥昏迷量表评分为14 - 15分。患者被回顾性地分类为BIG类别(BIG 1、2或3)。查阅病历以确定临床上重要的TBI(ciTBI):死亡、神经功能恶化、神经外科干预、插管超过24小时或因TBI住院超过48小时。对获取的重复影像学研究进行损伤进展评估。记录并比较不同BIG类别中临床上重要的TBI(ciTBI)发生率和影像学进展情况。在受伤6个月后使用扩展格拉斯哥预后评分(GOS - E)评估预后。使用单变量和卡方检验进行分析比较。总体而言,804名受试者纳入分析,其中551名(68.5%)为转诊患者。总体而言,175名(21.8%)患者为BIG 1损伤,402名(50.0%)为BIG 2损伤,227名(28.2%)为BIG 3损伤。总体上64名(8.0%)患者发生了ciTBI,在BIG 1、2和3损伤患者中分别为(0.6%)、4名(1.0%)和59名(26.0%)(<0.0001)。在BIG 1、2和3损伤患者中,分别有0名(0%)、2名(0.5%)和41名(18.0%)的重复影像学检查显示损伤进展与神经功能下降、神经外科干预相关或导致进一步评估(<0.001)。在471名(58.6%)有6个月患者预后数据的患者中,98%的患者GOS - E≥5,且未观察到不同BIG类别之间的预后差异。使用BIG对轻度TBI进行风险分层能够合理识别出随后发生ciTBI的儿童,这表明BIG分类有助于对可能从神经外科会诊、重复影像学检查以及可能转至专门创伤中心中获益的患者进行分诊和管理。根据BIG判定的更严重损伤与更差的患者预后无关。