Adem Kaya1, Salim Satar2, Muge Gulen1, Selen Acehan1, Kemal Alper Afser3, Hakan Demirhindi4. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, Adana City Training and Research Hospital, Mithat Ozhan Avenue, 01370, Yuregir, Adana, Turkey. 2. Department of Emergency Medicine, Adana City Training and Research Hospital, Mithat Ozhan Avenue, 01370, Yuregir, Adana, Turkey. salim.satar@yahoo.com. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, Kilis State Hospital, Kilis, Turkey. 4. Department of Public Health, Çukurova University, Adana, Turkey.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) clinical decision rules can provide successful results in the differential diagnosis of non-traumatic headache. AIM: The aim of this study is to investigate whether a laboratory parameter that can be added to clinical decision-making rules can better predict subarachnoid haemorrhages in patients presenting to the emergency department with headache. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study between March 2017 and March 2019. Patients over the age of 18 who admitted to the emergency department with non-traumatic, acute headache last 14 days before admission and evaluated by imaging and laboratory studies were included in the study. RESULTS: A total of 867 patients were included and 141 of them had SAH. In detecting the SAH, Ottawa SAH rule sensitivity (85.1%), specificity (47.1%), positive predictive value (PPV) (23.8%) and negative predictive value (NPV) (94.2%), and for EMERALD SAH, rule sensitivity (96.4%), specificity (43.2%), PPV (24.8%) and NPV (98.4%). In the regression analysis, statistically significant result was obtained to exclude the diagnosis of SAH with the decrease in the eosinophil value (cutoff < 0.085 10^3/µL, OR: 0.011, 95% CI: 0.001-0.213, p = 0.003). When eosinophil value was added to EMERALD SAH rule, it provided a 100% of sensitivity, a 38.4% of specificity, a 24% of PPV and a 100% of NPV in detecting the SAH. CONCLUSIONS: EMERALD SAH rule plus eosinophil, which offers 100% sensitivity and NPV for predicting SAH in adult non-traumatic headaches, may be recommended as a successful and practical decision rule for clinical use according to the Ottawa and EMERALD SAH rule.
BACKGROUND: Subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) clinical decision rules can provide successful results in the differential diagnosis of non-traumatic headache. AIM: The aim of this study is to investigate whether a laboratory parameter that can be added to clinical decision-making rules can better predict subarachnoid haemorrhages in patients presenting to the emergency department with headache. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study between March 2017 and March 2019. Patients over the age of 18 who admitted to the emergency department with non-traumatic, acute headache last 14 days before admission and evaluated by imaging and laboratory studies were included in the study. RESULTS: A total of 867 patients were included and 141 of them had SAH. In detecting the SAH, Ottawa SAH rule sensitivity (85.1%), specificity (47.1%), positive predictive value (PPV) (23.8%) and negative predictive value (NPV) (94.2%), and for EMERALD SAH, rule sensitivity (96.4%), specificity (43.2%), PPV (24.8%) and NPV (98.4%). In the regression analysis, statistically significant result was obtained to exclude the diagnosis of SAH with the decrease in the eosinophil value (cutoff < 0.085 10^3/µL, OR: 0.011, 95% CI: 0.001-0.213, p = 0.003). When eosinophil value was added to EMERALD SAH rule, it provided a 100% of sensitivity, a 38.4% of specificity, a 24% of PPV and a 100% of NPV in detecting the SAH. CONCLUSIONS: EMERALD SAH rule plus eosinophil, which offers 100% sensitivity and NPV for predicting SAH in adult non-traumatic headaches, may be recommended as a successful and practical decision rule for clinical use according to the Ottawa and EMERALD SAH rule.
Authors: Bryan Williams; Giuseppe Mancia; Wilko Spiering; Enrico Agabiti Rosei; Michel Azizi; Michel Burnier; Denis L Clement; Antonio Coca; Giovanni de Simone; Anna Dominiczak; Thomas Kahan; Felix Mahfoud; Josep Redon; Luis Ruilope; Alberto Zanchetti; Mary Kerins; Sverre E Kjeldsen; Reinhold Kreutz; Stephane Laurent; Gregory Y H Lip; Richard McManus; Krzysztof Narkiewicz; Frank Ruschitzka; Roland E Schmieder; Evgeny Shlyakhto; Costas Tsioufis; Victor Aboyans; Ileana Desormais Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2018-09-01 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Nima Etminan; Han-Sol Chang; Katharina Hackenberg; Nicolien K de Rooij; Mervyn D I Vergouwen; Gabriel J E Rinkel; Ale Algra Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2019-05-01 Impact factor: 18.302
Authors: E Sander Connolly; Alejandro A Rabinstein; J Ricardo Carhuapoma; Colin P Derdeyn; Jacques Dion; Randall T Higashida; Brian L Hoh; Catherine J Kirkness; Andrew M Naidech; Christopher S Ogilvy; Aman B Patel; B Gregory Thompson; Paul Vespa Journal: Stroke Date: 2012-05-03 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Kevin H Chu; Gerben Keijzers; Jeremy S Furyk; Robert M Eley; Frances B Kinnear; Ogilvie N Thom; Tegwen E Howell; Ibrahim Mahmoud; Joseph Y S Ting; Anthony F T Brown Journal: Eur J Emerg Med Date: 2018-12 Impact factor: 2.799