Heather R Kregel1, Patrick B Murphy, Mina Attia, David E Meyer, Rachel S Morris, Ezenwa C Onyema, Sasha D Adams, Charles E Wade, John A Harvin, Lillian S Kao, Thaddeus J Puzio. 1. From the Division of Acute Care Surgery, Department of Surgery (H.R.K., M.A., D.E.M., E.C.O., S.D.A., C.E.W., J.A.H., L.S.K., T.J.P.), and Center for Surgical Trials and Evidence-based Practice (H.R.K., M.A., D.E.M., S.D.A., J.A.H., L.S.K., T.J.P.), McGovern Medical School at UTHealth; Center for Translational Injury Research (H.R.K., D.E.M., S.D.A., C.E.W., J.A.H., L.S.K., T.J.P.), Houston, Texas; and Department of Surgery (P.B.M., R.S.M.), Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Malnutrition is associated with increased morbidity and mortality after trauma. The Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) is a validated scoring system used to predict the risk of complications related to malnutrition in nontrauma patients. We hypothesized that GNRI is predictive of worse outcomes in geriatric trauma patients. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective study of trauma patients 65 years or older admitted in 2019. Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index was calculated based on admission albumin level and ratio of actual body weight to ideal body weight. Groups were defined as major risk (GNRI <82), moderate risk (GNRI 82-91), low risk (GNRI 92-98), and no risk (GNRI >98). The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes included ventilator days, intensive care unit length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, discharge home, sepsis, pneumonia, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the association between GNRI risk category and outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 513 patients were identified for analysis. Median age was 78 years (71-86 years); 24 patients (4.7%) were identified as major risk, 66 (12.9%) as moderate risk, 72 (14%) as low risk, and 351 (68.4%) as no risk. Injury Severity Scores and Charlson Comorbidity Indexes were similar between all groups. Patients in the no risk group had decreased rates of death, and after adjusting for Injury Severity Score, age, and Charlson Comorbidity Index, the no risk group had decreased odds of death (odds ratio, 0.13; 95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.41) compared with the major risk group. The no risk group also had fewer infectious complications including sepsis and pneumonia, and shorter hospital LOS and were more likely to be discharged home. CONCLUSIONS: Major GNRI risk is associated with increased mortality and infectious complications in geriatric trauma patients. Further studies should target interventional strategies for those at highest risk based on GNRI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiologic; Level III.
BACKGROUND: Malnutrition is associated with increased morbidity and mortality after trauma. The Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) is a validated scoring system used to predict the risk of complications related to malnutrition in nontrauma patients. We hypothesized that GNRI is predictive of worse outcomes in geriatric trauma patients. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective study of trauma patients 65 years or older admitted in 2019. Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index was calculated based on admission albumin level and ratio of actual body weight to ideal body weight. Groups were defined as major risk (GNRI <82), moderate risk (GNRI 82-91), low risk (GNRI 92-98), and no risk (GNRI >98). The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes included ventilator days, intensive care unit length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, discharge home, sepsis, pneumonia, and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the association between GNRI risk category and outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 513 patients were identified for analysis. Median age was 78 years (71-86 years); 24 patients (4.7%) were identified as major risk, 66 (12.9%) as moderate risk, 72 (14%) as low risk, and 351 (68.4%) as no risk. Injury Severity Scores and Charlson Comorbidity Indexes were similar between all groups. Patients in the no risk group had decreased rates of death, and after adjusting for Injury Severity Score, age, and Charlson Comorbidity Index, the no risk group had decreased odds of death (odds ratio, 0.13; 95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.41) compared with the major risk group. The no risk group also had fewer infectious complications including sepsis and pneumonia, and shorter hospital LOS and were more likely to be discharged home. CONCLUSIONS: Major GNRI risk is associated with increased mortality and infectious complications in geriatric trauma patients. Further studies should target interventional strategies for those at highest risk based on GNRI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiologic; Level III.
Authors: Erik von Elm; Douglas G Altman; Matthias Egger; Stuart J Pocock; Peter C Gøtzsche; Jan P Vandenbroucke Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Gordon L Jensen; Tommy Cederholm; M Isabel T D Correia; M Christina Gonzalez; Ryoji Fukushima; Takashi Higashiguchi; Gertrudis Adrianza de Baptista; Rocco Barazzoni; Renée Blaauw; Andrew J S Coats; Adriana Crivelli; David C Evans; Leah Gramlich; Vanessa Fuchs-Tarlovsky; Heather Keller; Luisito Llido; Ainsley Malone; Kris M Mogensen; John E Morley; Maurizio Muscaritoli; Ibolya Nyulasi; Matthias Pirlich; Veeradej Pisprasert; Marian de van der Schueren; Soranit Siltharm; Pierre Singer; Kelly A Tappenden; Nicolas Velasco; Dan L Waitzberg; Preyanuj Yamwong; Jianchun Yu; Charlene Compher; Andre Van Gossum Journal: JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr Date: 2018-09-02 Impact factor: 4.016
Authors: Pascale Comette; William D'Hoore; Brigitte Malhomme; Dominique Van Pee; Philippe Meert; Christian Swine Journal: Aging Clin Exp Res Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 3.636
Authors: Elaheh Rahbar; Jessica C Cardenas; Gyulnar Baimukanova; Benjamin Usadi; Roberta Bruhn; Shibani Pati; Sisse R Ostrowski; Pär I Johansson; John B Holcomb; Charles E Wade Journal: J Transl Med Date: 2015-04-12 Impact factor: 5.531
Authors: Paul E Wischmeyer; Michel Hasselmann; Christine Kummerlen; Rosemary Kozar; Demetrios James Kutsogiannis; Constantine J Karvellas; Beth Besecker; David K Evans; Jean-Charles Preiser; Leah Gramlich; Khursheed Jeejeebhoy; Rupinder Dhaliwal; Xuran Jiang; Andrew G Day; Daren K Heyland Journal: Crit Care Date: 2017-06-09 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Cheng-Hsi Yeh; Shao-Chun Wu; Sheng-En Chou; Wei-Ti Su; Ching-Hua Tsai; Chi Li; Shiun-Yuan Hsu; Ching-Hua Hsieh Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-12-10 Impact factor: 3.390