| Literature DB >> 34462880 |
Anna M Janas1,2, FeiFei Qin3, Scott Hamilton4, Bin Jiang5, Nicole Baier6, Max Wintermark5, Zachary Threlkeld4, Sarah Lee4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is the leading cause of death and disability in children, but effective tools for predicting outcome remain elusive. Although many pediatric patients receive early magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), data on its utility in prognostication are lacking. Diffuse axonal injury (DAI) is a hallmark of TBI detected on early MRI and was shown previously to improve prognostication in adult patients with TBI. In this exploratory study, we investigated whether DAI grade correlates with functional outcome and improves prognostic accuracy when combined with core clinical variables and computed tomography (CT) biomarkers in pediatric patients with moderate-severe TBI (msTBI).Entities:
Keywords: Diffuse axonal injury; Magnetic resonance imaging; Neuroimaging; Pediatric neurocritical care; Traumatic brain injury
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34462880 PMCID: PMC8405042 DOI: 10.1007/s12028-021-01336-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Neurocrit Care ISSN: 1541-6933 Impact factor: 3.532
Fig. 1Study flowchart of patient selection. CNS central nervous system, GCS Glasgow Coma Scale, ICD international classification of diseases, MRI magnetic resonance imaging, TBI traumatic brain injury
Demographic, clinical, and imaging characteristics of patients with moderate and severe TBI patients by (A) functional outcome and (B) discharge disposition
| Variable | All ( | Functional outcome | Discharge disposition | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Favorable outcome ( | Unfavorable outcome ( | Discharge to home ( | Discharge to rehabilitation ( | ||||
| Age (years), median (Q1, Q3) | 13 (6, 16) | 13 (6, 16) | 12 (6, 15) | 0.66 | 6 (1, 12) | 14 (9, 16) | 0.0027 |
| Age groups (years) | 0.70 | 0.025 | |||||
| 0–5 | 13 (23.6) | 10 (23.3) | 3 (25.0) | 5 (45.5) | 7 (18.4) | ||
| 6–12 | 14 (25.5) | 10 (23.3) | 4 (33.3) | 4 (36.4) | 7 (18.4) | ||
| 13–19 | 28 (50.9) | 23 (53.5) | 5 (41.7) | 2 (18.2) | 24 (63.2) | ||
| Initial GCS score, median (Q1, Q3) | 6 (3, 8) | 6 (4, 8) | 3 (3, 4.5) | 0.001 | 9 (6, 11) | 5 (3, 7) | 0.0009 |
| Initial TBI severity | 0.0045 | ||||||
| Moderate (GCS scores 9–12) | 10 (18.2) | 10 (23.3) | 0 (0.0) | 0.096 | 6 (54.5) | 4 (10.5) | |
| Severe (GCS scores 3–8) | 45 (81.8) | 33 (76.7) | 12 (100.0) | 5 (45.5) | 34 (89.5) | ||
| Pupil reactivity | 0.087 | 0.47 | |||||
| Both reactive | 28 (50.9) | 25 (58.1) | 3 (25.0) | 8 (72.7) | 18 (47.4) | ||
| One reactive | 12 (21.8) | 9 (20.9) | 3 (25.0) | 1 (9.1) | 8 (21.1) | ||
| Neither reactive | 15 (27.3) | 9 (20.9) | 6 (50.0) | 2 (18.2) | 12 (31.6) | ||
| Mechanism of injury | 0.58 | 0.017 | |||||
| MVC | 39 (70.9) | 31 (72.1) | 8 (66.7) | 4 (36.4) | 30 (78.9) | ||
| Fall | 11 (20.0) | 7 (16.3) | 4 (33.3) | 4 (36.4) | 6 (15.8) | ||
| Sports | 4 (7.3) | 4 (9.3) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (18.2) | 2 (5.3) | ||
| Other | 1 (1.8) | 1 (2.3) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (9.1) | 0 (0.0) | ||
| Mechanism of MVC ( | 0.84 | 0.097 | |||||
| Passenger | 25 (64.1) | 20 (64.5) | 5 (62.5) | 1 (9.1) | 20 (52.6) | ||
| Pedestrian | 11 (28.2) | 9 (29.0) | 2 (25.0) | 3 (27.3) | 7 (18.4) | ||
| Bike | 3 (7.7) | 2 (6.5) | 1 (12.5) | 0 (0.0) | 3 (7.9) | ||
| Neurosurgical Intervention | |||||||
| Any | 42 (76.4) | 30 (69.8) | 12 (100.0) | 0.049 | 7 (63.6) | 29 (76.3) | 0.45 |
| ICP monitoring | 37 (67.3) | 25 (58.1) | 12 (100.0) | 0.0052 | 5 (45.5) | 27 (71.1) | 0.16 |
| Craniectomy for bleeding | 12 (21.8) | 7 (16.3) | 5 (41.7) | 0.11 | 2 (18.2) | 6 (15.8) | 1.00 |
| Craniectomy for ICP | 7 (12.7) | 5 (11.6) | 2 (16.7) | 0.64 | 0 (0.0) | 7 (18.4) | 0.33 |
| AED/Sseizures | |||||||
| AED prophylaxis | 40 (72.7) | 29 (67.4) | 11 (91.7) | 0.15 | 8 (72.7) | 27 (71.1) | 1.00 |
| Post-traumatic seizures | 13 (23.6) | 11 (25.6) | 2 (16.7) | 0.71 | 5 (45.5) | 7 (18.4) | 0.11 |
| Hospital course, median (Q1, Q3) | |||||||
| Days on ventilator | 11 (3, 20) | 10 (2, 17) | 29 (9.5, 46) | 0.0057 | 1 (1, 5) | 14.5 (7, 25) | 0.0005 |
| Days in ICU | 15 (8, 26) | 14 (8, 22) | 23.5 (9.5, 44) | 0.085 | 8 (2, 10) | 21 (12, 28) | 0.0002 |
| Total days in hospital | 23 (11, 33) | 21 (11, 29) | 28 (10, 45) | 0.30 | 9 (5, 17) | 27 (19, 34) | 0.0002 |
| Tracheostomya* | 14 (26.9) | 7 (16.3) | 7 (77.8) | 0.0007 | 0 (0.0) | 12 (31.6) | 0.045 |
| PEGa* | 24 (46.2) | 16 (37.2) | 8 (88.9) | 0.0078 | 0 (0.0) | 22 (57.9) | 0.0005 |
| Acute hemorrhage on CT | |||||||
| Any | 46 (83.6) | 34 (79.1) | 12 (100.0) | 0.18 | 9 (81.8) | 31 (81.6) | 1.00 |
| EDH | 8 (14.5) | 7 (16.3) | 1 (8.3) | 0.67 | 4 (36.4) | 2 (5.3) | 0.018 |
| SDH | 32 (58.2) | 23 (53.5) | 9 (75.0) | 0.18 | 6 (54.5) | 23 (60.5) | 0.74 |
| tSAH | 30 (54.6) | 19 (44.2) | 11 (91.7) | 0.0035 | 3 (27.3) | 22 (57.9) | 0.074 |
| IVH | 16 (29.1) | 14 (32.6) | 2 (16.7) | 0.47 | 4 (36.4) | 10 (26.3) | 0.71 |
| Rotterdam CT score, median (Q1, Q3) | 3 (2, 3) | 3 (2, 3) | 3 (3, 4.5) | 0.013 | 3 (2, 4) | 3 (2, 3) | 0.69 |
| Rotterdam CT score | 0.018 | 0.51 | |||||
| 1 | 2 (3.6) | 2 (4.7) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (9.1) | 1 (2.6) | ||
| 2 | 17 (30.9) | 17 (39.5) | 0 (0.0) | 4 (36.4) | 13 (34.2) | ||
| 3 | 23 (41.8) | 15 (34.9) | 8 (66.7) | 3 (27.3) | 16 (42.1) | ||
| 4 | 7 (12.7) | 6 (14.0) | 1 (8.3) | 3 (27.3) | 4 (10.5) | ||
| 5 | 4 (7.3) | 2 (4.7) | 2 (16.7) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (5.3) | ||
| 6 | 2 (3.6) | 1 (2.3) | 1 (8.3) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (5.3) | ||
| DAI grade, median (Q1, Q3) | 2 (1, 3) | 2 (1, 3) | 3 (2.5, 3) | 0.018 | 1 (0, 2) | 2.5 (2, 3) | 0.0092 |
| DAI grade | 0.051 | 0.023 | |||||
| 0 | 7 (12.7) | 6 (14.0) | 1 (8.3) | 3 (27.3) | 3 (7.9) | ||
| 1 | 12 (21.8) | 12 (27.9) | 0 (0.0) | 5 (45.5) | 6 (15.8) | ||
| 2 | 12 (21.8) | 10 (23.3) | 2 (16.7) | 1 (9.1) | 10 (26.3) | ||
| 3 | 24 (43.6) | 15 (34.9) | 9 (75.0) | 2 (18.2) | 19 (50.0) | ||
| Evidence of hypoxic-ischemic injury | 16 (29.1) | 7 (16.3) | 9 (75.0) | 0.0003 | 1 (9.1) | 11 (28.9) | 0.25 |
| Days to MRI, median (Q1, Q3) | 5 (1, 13) | 4 (1, 14) | 8.5 (3.5, 11.5) | 0.34 | 2 (1, 5) | 8.5 (2, 14) | 0.020 |
| Discharge disposition | 0.0017 | ||||||
| Home | 11 (20.0) | 11 (25.6) | 0 (0.0) | ||||
| Acute rehabilitation | 38 (69.1) | 30 (69.8) | 8 (66.7) | ||||
| Transfer to another hospital | 2 (3.6) | 2 (4.7) | 0 (0.0) | ||||
| Transfer to long-term care facility | 1 (1.8) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (8.3) | ||||
| Death | 3 (5.5) | 0 (0.0) | 3 (25.0) | ||||
| 6-month PCPCS score, median (Q1, Q3) | 2 (1, 3) | 2 (1, 2) | 4 (4, 5) | < 0.0001 | 1 (1, 2) | 2 (2, 3) | 0.0011 |
| Follow-up time (months), median (Q1, Q3) | 6 (4, 6.5) | 6 (4, 7) | 6 (4, 6) | 0.95 | 4 (2, 6) | 6 (5, 7) | 0.0074 |
| 1-year PCPCS, median (Q1, Q3)b*** | 2 (2, 3) | 2 (2, 2) | 4 (4, 6) | < 0.0001 | 1 (1, 2) | 2 (2, 3) | 0.046 |
| Follow- up time (months), median (Q1, Q3) | 12 (11, 14) | 12 (11, 14) | 12 (11, 13) | 0.97 | 14 (12, 14) | 12 (11, 14) | 0.37 |
| Lost to follow-up at 1 year | 14 | 14 | 0 | 6 | 7 | ||
All variables are displayed as N (%), unless specified otherwise
AED antiepileptic drugs, CT computed tomography, DAI diffuse axonal injury, EDH epidural hematoma, GCS Glasgow Coma Scale, ICP intracranial pressure, ICU intensive care unit, IVH intraventricular hemorrhage, MRI magnetic resonance imaging, MVC motor vehicle collision, PCPCS Pediatric Cerebral Performance Category Scale, PEG percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy, SDH subdural hematoma, TBI traumatic brain injury, tSAH traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage
a*Tracheostomy/PEG at discharge missing N = 3 for patients who died during admission
b***Two patients improved PCPCS score from 4 to 3 at 1-year follow-up. As such, favorable group at 1 year has n = 31 and unfavorable group has n = 10
IMPACT core predictors and their associated odds ratiosORs in the core model for predicting unfavorable outcome and discharge to inpatient rehabilitation
| Model | Unfavorable 6-month functional outcome | Discharge to inpatient rehabilitation | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95% CI) | OR (95% CI) | |||
| Model 1 (IMPACT variables) | ||||
| Age | 0.88 (0.74, − 1.04) | 0.14 | 1.16 (1.00, − 1.35) | 0.045 |
| GCS initial motor score | 0.34 (0.15, − 0.73) | 0.0061 | 0.53 (0.27, − 1.03) | 0.061 |
| Pupillary light reactivity | ||||
| Both pupils react | Reference | 0.31 | Reference | 0.47 |
| One pupil reacts | 1.08 (0.13, − 9.28) | 2.69 (0.19, − 38.28) | ||
| Both no reaction | 3.68 (0.60, − 22.47) | 3.32 (0.39, − 28.30) | ||
| Model 2 | ||||
| Rotterdam CT score | 1.98 (1.09, − 3.61) | 0.026 | 1.25 (0.64, − 2.45) | 0.51 |
| Model 3 | ||||
| DAI grade | 2.44 (1.06, − 5.66) | 0.037 | 2.46 (1.23, − 4.95) | 0.011 |
| Model 4 (IMPACT + Rotterdam) | ||||
| Age | 0.84 (0.69, − 1.03) | 0.10 | 1.16 (1.0, − 1.35) | 0.055 |
| GCS initial motor score | 0.33 (0.14, − 0.76) | 0.0093 | 0.52 (0.27, − 1.03) | 0.061 |
| Pupillary light reactivity | 0.32 | |||
| Both pupils react | Reference | Reference | 0.47 | |
| One pupil reacts | 0.77 (0.083, − 7.14) | 2.77 (0.18, − 42.22) | ||
| Both no reaction | 3.35 (0.50, − 22.40) | 3.35 (0.39, − 28.81) | ||
| Rotterdam CT score | 1.76 (0.79, − 3.91) | 0.16 | 0.95 (0.36, − 2.47) | 0.91 |
| Model 5 (MPACT + DAI) | ||||
| Age | 0.89 (0.74, − 1.06) | 0.17 | 1.15 (0.99, − 1.34) | 0.060 |
| GCS initial motor score | 0.37 (0.17, − 0.85) | 0.018 | 0.62 (0.30, − 1.26) | 0.19 |
| Pupillary light reactivity | 0.34 | 0.52 | ||
| Both pupils react | Reference | Reference | ||
| One pupil reacts | 1.16 (0.13, − 10.51) | 2.56 (0.17, − 39.50) | ||
| Both no reaction | 3.56 (0.58, − 21.90) | 3.09 (0.36, − 26.65) | ||
| DAI grade | 1.64 (0.56, − 4.81) | 0.37 | 1.61 (0.71, − 3.69) | 0.26 |
CI confidence interval, CT computed tomography, DAI diffuse axonal injury, GCS Glasgow Coma Scale, IMPACT international mission for prognosis and analysis of clinical trials in traumatic brain injury, OR odds ratio
Fig. 2Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis of the five different prediction models in discriminating unfavorable functional outcome (a) and discharge to inpatient rehabilitation (b) with AUC values for the core model and the additional effects of the Rotterdam CT score and DAI grade (c). AUC area under the curve, CI confidence interval, CT computed tomography, DAI diffuse axonal injury, IMPACT international mission for prognosis and analysis of clinical trials in traumatic brain injury