Victoria Juárez San Juan Ana, Juárez San Juan Paula, Artiles Armas Manuel, Cano Contreras Laura, Beltrán Calero Paula, Jorge Ripper Carlos, Rodriguez Suárez Pedro, Freixinet Gilart Jorge L
Servicio de Cirugía Torácica, Hospital Universitario Doctor Negrín, C/ Plaza Barranco de la Ballena s/n, 35010 Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Gran Canaria, Spain.
Unidad de Cuidados Críticos del Servicio de Urgencias, Hospital Universitario Doctor Negrín, C/ Plaza Barranco de la Ballena s/n, 35010 Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Gran Canaria, Spain.
Cir Esp (Engl Ed). 2025 Jun;103(6):800111. doi: 10.1016/j.cireng.2025.800111. Epub 2025 May 16.
This study aims to analyze differences between the prognostic scales in the initial assessment of severe trauma, SIAG ((Shock Index × Age)/Glasgow Coma Scale) upon arrival at the hospital and at the scene of the trauma (dSIAG). It has been compared with other prognostic scales, including the Shock Index (SI), RTS (Revised Trauma Score) and ISS (Injury Severity Score), given that these scales may underestimate the risk of mortality in some polytrauma patients.
We have conducted a retrospective, observational study with a cohort of patients admitted to the Critical Care Unit of a tertiary center with a diagnosis of trauma from 2018-2020. The SI, dSI, SIAG, dSIAG, RTS and ISS scales were calculated. The AUC-ROC (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) of each one was compared for M24 (mortality in the first 24 h) and HM (hospital mortality).
Out of the 113 patients included, 11 died (9.7%), 9 in the first 24 h (8%). All scores were related to mortality. The dSIAG had the best AUC-ROC for M24 (0.88; 95%CI 0.80-0.96) and MH (0.84; 95%CI 0.71-0.96), although the results between dSIAG and SIAG were similar. The dSIAG value of 0.3 points showed a sensitivity of 77% and specificity of 78% for HM and 89% and 77% for M24. The AUC-ROC of the dSIAG for HM was higher than the classic RTS and ISS scores.
The dSIAG is similar to the SIAG and higher than the classic ISS and RTS scores as a predictor of HM in the initial assessment of polytrauma patients.
本研究旨在分析严重创伤初始评估中预后量表的差异,即入院时及创伤现场的SIAG(休克指数×年龄/格拉斯哥昏迷量表)(dSIAG)。鉴于这些量表可能低估某些多发伤患者的死亡风险,已将其与其他预后量表进行比较,包括休克指数(SI)、RTS(修订创伤评分)和ISS(损伤严重度评分)。
我们对2018年至2020年在一家三级中心重症监护病房收治的诊断为创伤的患者队列进行了一项回顾性观察研究。计算了SI、dSI、SIAG、dSIAG、RTS和ISS量表。比较了各量表在M24(最初24小时内的死亡率)和HM(医院死亡率)方面的受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC-ROC)。
纳入的113例患者中,11例死亡(9.7%),其中9例在最初24小时内死亡(8%)。所有评分均与死亡率相关。dSIAG在M24(0.88;95%CI 0.80-0.9)和MH(0.84;95%CI 0.71-0.96)方面具有最佳的AUC-ROC,尽管dSIAG和SIAG之间的结果相似。dSIAG值为0.3分时,对HM的敏感性为77%,特异性为78%,对M24的敏感性为89%,特异性为77%。dSIAG对HM的AUC-ROC高于经典的RTS和ISS评分。
在多发伤患者的初始评估中,dSIAG作为HM的预测指标与SIAG相似,且高于经典的ISS和RTS评分。