ArticleNeurosurgical review2020
Craniocervical trauma above the age of 90: are current prognostic scores sufficient?
Article in Neurosurgical review, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of risk factors for perioperative complications in spine surgery.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- The "springform" technique in cranioplasty: custom made 3D-printed templates for intraoperative modelling of polymethylmethacrylate cranial implants.Acta neurochirurgica · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinical data following head or spine trauma in patients over 90 years is rare. The aim of this study was to analyze this patient cohort, assessing clinical characteristics, outcomes, and survival rates and to identify variables that may predict early mortality. A retrospective analysis of all patients over the age of 90 that were treated between January 2006 and December 2016 at our department was performed. Patient characteristics, type of injury, and comorbidities were analyzed with regard to the 30-day mortality rate as the primary outcome. One hundred seventy-nine patients were identified. Mean age was 93 (range 90-102); 105 (59%) patients were female. One hundred thirty-two (74%) and 34 (19%) of patients presented with head and spinal trauma, respectively. Fourteen patients (8%) had a combined head and spine injury. One hundred (56%) patients were treated operatively. Mean Charlson comorbidity index was 4.1 (range 0-18), mean diagnosis count was 6.2 (range 0-12), mean geriatric index of comorbidity (GIC) was 3.3 (range 1-4), and mean Barthel index was 28 (range 0-100). The 30-day mortality rate was 31%. Multivariate cox regression analysis showed that head trauma had a 1.66 hazard ratio (p = 0.036) of dying within 30 days of admission, whereas a higher Glasgow coma score and surgical treatment had a hazard ratio of 0.88 (p = 0.0001) and 0.72 (p = 0.05) to reach the primary outcome. None of the standard geriatric scores reached any significant correlation with the primary outcome. Standard geriatric prognostic scores seem less reliable to predict mortality for patients above the age of 90. Higher Glasgow coma score and surgical treatment were associated with a higher survival probability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31197623What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.