Introduction

Neuroworsening may be a sign of progressive brain injury and is a factor for treatment of traumatic brain injury (TBI) in intensive care settings. The implications of neuroworsening for clinical management and long-term sequelae of TBI in the emergency department (ED) require characterization.

Methods

Adult TBI subjects from the prospective Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury Pilot Study with ED admission and disposition Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) scores were extracted. All patients received head computed tomography (CT) scan <24 h post-injury. Neuroworsening was defined as a decline in motor GCS at ED disposition (vs. ED admission). Clinical and CT characteristics, neurosurgical intervention, in-hospital mortality, and 3- and 6-month Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOS-E) scores were compared by neuroworsening status. Multivariable regressions were performed for neurosurgical intervention and unfavorable outcome (GOS-E ≤ 3). Multivariable odds ratios (mOR) with [95% confidence intervals] were reported.

Results

In 481 subjects, 91.1% had ED admission GCS 13-15 and 3.3% had neuroworsening. All neuroworsening subjects were admitted to intensive care unit (vs. non-neuroworsening: 26.2%) and were CT-positive for structural injury (vs. 45.4%). Neuroworsening was associated with subdural (75.0%/22.2%), subarachnoid (81.3%/31.2%), and intraventricular hemorrhage (18.8%/2.2%), contusion (68.8%/20.4%), midline shift (50.0%/2.6%), cisternal compression (56.3%/5.6%), and cerebral edema (68.8%/12.3%; all p < 0.001). Neuroworsening subjects had higher likelihoods of cranial surgery (56.3%/3.5%), intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring (62.5%/2.6%), in-hospital mortality (37.5%/0.6%), and unfavorable 3- and 6-month outcome (58.3%/4.9%; 53.8%/6.2%; all p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, neuroworsening predicted surgery (mOR = 4.65 [1.02-21.19]), ICP monitoring (mOR = 15.48 [2.92-81.85], and unfavorable 3- and 6-month outcome (mOR = 5.36 [1.13-25.36]; mOR = 5.68 [1.18-27.35]).

Conclusions

Neuroworsening in the ED is an early indicator of TBI severity, and a predictor of neurosurgical intervention and unfavorable outcome. Clinicians must be vigilant in detecting neuroworsening, as affected patients are at increased risk for poor outcomes and may benefit from immediate therapeutic interventions.

OBJECTIVE: The International Mission on Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials in Traumatic Brain Injury (IMPACT) and Corticosteroid Randomization After Significant Head Injury (CRASH) prognostic models for mortality and outcome after traumatic brain injury (TBI) were developed using data from 1984 to 2004. This study examined IMPACT and CRASH model performances in a contemporary cohort of US patients. METHODS: The prospective 18-center Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury (TRACK-TBI) study (enrollment years 2014-2018) enrolled subjects aged ≥ 17 years who presented to level I trauma centers and received head CT within 24 hours of TBI. Data were extracted from the subjects who met the model criteria (for IMPACT, Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] score 3-12 with 6-month Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended [GOSE] data [n = 441]; for CRASH, GCS score 3-14 with 2-week mortality data and 6-month GOSE data [n = 831]). Analyses were conducted in the overall cohort and stratified on the basis of TBI severity (severe/moderate/mild TBI defined as GCS score 3-8/9-12/13-14), age (17-64 years or ≥ 65 years), and the 5 top enrolling sites. Unfavorable outcome was defined as GOSE score 1-4. Original IMPACT and CRASH model coefficients were applied, and model performances were assessed by calibration (intercept [< 0 indicated overprediction; > 0 indicated underprediction] and slope) and discrimination (c-statistic). RESULTS: Overall, the IMPACT models overpredicted mortality (intercept -0.79 [95% CI -1.05 to -0.53], slope 1.37 [1.05-1.69]) and acceptably predicted unfavorable outcome (intercept 0.07 [-0.14 to 0.29], slope 1.19 [0.96-1.42]), with good discrimination (c-statistics 0.84 and 0.83, respectively). The CRASH models overpredicted mortality (intercept -1.06 [-1.36 to -0.75], slope 0.96 [0.79-1.14]) and unfavorable outcome (intercept -0.60 [-0.78 to -0.41], slope 1.20 [1.03-1.37]), with good discrimination (c-statistics 0.92 and 0.88, respectively). IMPACT overpredicted mortality and acceptably predicted unfavorable outcome in the severe and moderate TBI subgroups, with good discrimination (c-statistic ≥ 0.81). CRASH overpredicted mortality in the severe and moderate TBI subgroups and acceptably predicted mortality in the mild TBI subgroup, with good discrimination (c-statistic ≥ 0.86); unfavorable outcome was overpredicted in the severe and mild TBI subgroups with adequate discrimination (c-statistic ≥ 0.78), whereas calibration was nonlinear in the moderate TBI subgroup. In subjects ≥ 65 years of age, the models performed variably (IMPACT-mortality, intercept 0.28, slope 0.68, and c-statistic 0.68; CRASH-unfavorable outcome, intercept -0.97, slope 1.32, and c-statistic 0.88; nonlinear calibration for IMPACT-unfavorable outcome and CRASH-mortality). Model performance differences were observed across the top enrolling sites for mortality and unfavorable outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The IMPACT and CRASH models adequately discriminated mortality and unfavorable outcome. Observed overestimations of mortality and unfavorable outcome underscore the need to update prognostic models to incorporate contemporary changes in TBI management and case-mix. Investigations to elucidate the relationships between increased survival, outcome, treatment intensity, and site-specific practices will be relevant to improve models in specific TBI subpopulations (e.g., older adults), which may benefit from the inclusion of blood-based biomarkers, neuroimaging features, and treatment data.

BACKGROUND: Contemporary surgical practices for traumatic brain injury (TBI) remain unclear. We describe the clinical profile of an 18-centre US TBI cohort with cranial surgery. METHODS: The prospective, observational Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury Study (2014-2018; ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT02119182) enrolled subjects who presented to trauma centre and received head computed tomography within 24-h (h) post-TBI. We performed a secondary data analysis in subjects aged ≥17-years with hospitalisation. Clinical characteristics, surgery type/timing, hospital and six-month outcomes were reported. FINDINGS: Of 2032 subjects (age: mean = 41.4-years, range = 17-89-years; male = 71% female = 29%), 260 underwent cranial surgery, comprising 65% decompressive craniectomy, 23% craniotomy, 12% other surgery. Subjects with surgery (vs. without surgery) presented with worse neurological injury (median Glasgow Coma Scale = 6 vs. 15; midline shift ≥5 mm: 48% vs. 2%; cisternal effacement: 61% vs. 4%; p < 0.0001). Median time-to-craniectomy/craniotomy was 1.8 h (interquartile range = 1.1-5.0 h), and 67% underwent intracranial pressure monitoring. Seventy-three percent of subjects with decompressive craniectomy and 58% of subjects with craniotomy had ≥3 intracranial lesion types. Decompressive craniectomy (vs. craniotomy) was associated with intracranial injury severity (median Rotterdam Score = 4 vs. 3, p < 0.0001), intensive care length of stay (median = 13 vs. 4-days, p = 0.0002), and six-month unfavourable outcome (62% vs. 30%; p = 0.0001). Earlier time-to-craniectomy was associated with intracranial injury severity. INTERPRETATION: In a large representative cohort of patients hospitalised with TBI, surgical decision-making and time-to-surgery aligned with intracranial injury severity. Multifocal TBIs predominated in patients with cranial surgery. These findings summarise current TBI surgical practice across US trauma centres and provide the foundation for analyses in targeted subpopulations. FUNDING: National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; US Department of Defense; Neurosurgery Research and Education Foundation.

OBJECTIVES: An estimated 14-23% of patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) incur multiple lifetime TBIs. The relationship between prior TBI and outcomes in patients with moderate to severe TBI (msTBI) is not well delineated. We examined the associations between prior TBI, in-hospital mortality, and outcomes up to 12 months after injury in a prospective US msTBI cohort. METHODS: Data from hospitalized subjects with Glasgow Coma Scale score of 3-12 were extracted from the Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury Study (enrollment period: 2014-2019). Prior TBI with amnesia or alteration of consciousness was assessed using the Ohio State University TBI Identification Method. Competing risk regressions adjusting for age, sex, psychiatric history, cranial injury and extracranial injury severity examined the associations between prior TBI and in-hospital mortality, with hospital discharged alive as the competing risk. Adjusted HRs (aHR (95% CI)) were reported. Multivariable logistic regressions assessed the associations between prior TBI, mortality, and unfavorable outcome (Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended score 1-3 (vs. 4-8)) at 3, 6, and 12 months after injury. RESULTS: Of 405 acute msTBI subjects, 21.5% had prior TBI, which was associated with male sex (87.4% vs. 77.0%, p=0.037) and psychiatric history (34.5% vs. 20.7%, p=0.010). In-hospital mortality was 10.1% (prior TBI: 17.2%, no prior TBI: 8.2%, p=0.025). Competing risk regressions indicated that prior TBI was associated with likelihood of in-hospital mortality (aHR=2.06 (1.01-4.22)), but not with hospital discharged alive. Prior TBI was not associated with mortality or unfavorable outcomes at 3, 6, and 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: After acute msTBI, prior TBI history is independently associated with in-hospital mortality but not with mortality or unfavorable outcomes within 12 months after injury. This selective association underscores the importance of collecting standardized prior TBI history data early after acute hospitalization to inform risk stratification. Prospective validation studies are needed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02119182.