| Literature DB >> 26496765 |
Ronald H M A Bartels1, Frederick J A Meijer2, Hans van der Hoeven3, Michael Edwards4, Mathias Prokop5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Traumatic acute subdural hematoma has a high mortality despite intensive treatment. Despite the existence of several prediction models, it is very hard to predict an outcome. We investigated whether a specific combination of initial head CT-scan findings is a factor in predicting outcome, especially non-survival.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26496765 PMCID: PMC4620003 DOI: 10.1186/s12883-015-0479-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Neurol ISSN: 1471-2377 Impact factor: 2.474
Fig. 1Depicting a CT scan of a patient who suffered from a right sided acute subdural hematoma. The standard windows W/L is shown in (a), and also the method to measure the thickness of the hematoma (**) and the midlineshift (midline ***, shift *). The thickness of the hematoma was 5 mm and the MLS 15 mm. After adapting the windows W/L was to the suggested level (b) the thickness of the hematoma was 10 mm and the MLS 15 mm
Concomittant disease and relation to dichotomized outcome (survived versus dead)
| Concomittant disease | Survived | Dead | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| None | 7 | 10 | 17 |
| Hypertension | 3 | 1 | 4 |
| Diabetes mellitus | 2 | 3 | 51 |
| Occlusive vascular disease | 11 | 14 | 25 |
| Psychiatric disorder | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Alcohol abuse (>5E daily) | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Various (e.g. Downs’ syndrome) | 4 | 1 | 6 |
| Total | 29 | 30 | 59 |
Bleeding diathesis and relation to dichotomized outcome (survived versus dead)
| Bleeding diathesis | Survived | Dead | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| None | 18 | 16 | 34 |
| Alcohol abuse (>5E daily) | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Acetylsalicylic acid | 6 | 7 | 13 |
| Vitamin-K antagonist | 4 | 6 | 10 |
| Total | 29 | 30 | 59 |
Intra – and inter- observer reliability of the two evaluations of initial CT (MLS: midline shift, TH: thickness hematoma) In the second through last column 1, 2 respectively 3 mm were added to TH
| MLS > TH | MLS > TH + 1 | MLS > TH + 2 | MLS > TH +3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intra-rater reliability Observer 1 | 0.68 ± 0.12 | 0.3 ± 0.15 | 0.42 ± 0.17 | 0.64 ± 0.19 |
| Intra-rater reliability Observer 2 | 0.62 ± 0.11 | 0.73 ± 0.11 | 0.71 ± 0.12 | 0.82 ± 0.13 |
| Interobserver First evaluation | 0.67 ± 0.11 | 0.62 ± 0.13 | 0.64 ± 0.14 | 0.74 ± 0.14 |
| Interobserver Second evaluation | 0.40 ± 0.12 | 0.30 ± 0.15 | 0.38 ± 0.16 | 0.73 ± 0.18 |
Correlation between difference in midline shift and thickness hematoma + 3 mm with outcome. Eight patients were included totally
| Cramer’s V |
| Number of patients | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Observer 1 First evaluation | 0.331 | 0.01 | 6 |
| Observer 1 Second evaluation | 0.228 | 0.08 | 3 |
| Observer 2 First evaluation | 0.361 | 0.006 | 7 |
| Observer 2 Second evaluation | 0.299 | 0.02 | 5 |
Sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV for each evaluation session and each observer when comparing MLS to thickness of the hematoma plus 3 mm [value (95 % confidence interval)]
| Observer 1 | Observer 2 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Evaluation | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 |
| Sensitivity | 0.2 (0.08–0.39) | 0.1 (0.03–0.28) | 0.23 (0.17–0.43) | 0.17 (0.06–0.35) |
| Specificity | 1 (0.85–1) | 1 (0.85–1) | 1 (0.85–1) | 1 (0.85–1) |
| PPV | 1 (0.52–1) | 1 (0.31–1) | 1 (0.56–1) | 1 (0.46–1) |
| NPV | 0.55 (0.41–0.68) | 0.52 (0.38–0.65) | 0.56 (0.41–0.69) | 0.53 (0.4–0.67) |