Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36050580›Full record

Observational studyActa neurochirurgica2022

External validation of the NeuroImaging Radiological Interpretation System and Helsinki computed tomography score for mortality prediction in patients with traumatic brain injury treated in the intensive care unit: a Finnish intensive care consortium study.

Juho Vehviläinen, Markus Skrifvars, Matti Reinikainen, Stepani Bendel, Ruut Laitio, Sanna Hoppu, Tero Ala-Kokko, Jari Siironen, Rahul Raj

Abstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Acta neurochirurgica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Juho VehviläinenDepartment of Neurosurgery, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Topeliuksenkatu 5, P.B. 266, 00029 HUS, Helsinki, Finland. juho.vehvilainen@helsinki.fi.ORCID 0000-0001-7521-8512
Markus SkrifvarsDepartment of Emergency Care and Services, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.
Matti ReinikainenDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Kuopio University Hospital & University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland.
Stepani BendelDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Kuopio University Hospital & University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland.
Ruut LaitioDepartment of Perioperative Services, Intensive Care and Pain Management, Turku University Hospital & University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
Sanna HoppuDepartment of Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine Services, Department of Emergency, Anesthesia and Pain Medicine, Tampere University Hospital & University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland.
Tero Ala-KokkoResearch Group of Surgery, Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Division of Intensive Care, Medical Research Center, Oulu University Hospital & University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.
Jari SiironenDepartment of Neurosurgery, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Topeliuksenkatu 5, P.B. 266, 00029 HUS, Helsinki, Finland.
Rahul RajDepartment of Neurosurgery, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Topeliuksenkatu 5, P.B. 266, 00029 HUS, Helsinki, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdmission computed tomography (CT) scoring systems can be used to objectively quantify the severity of traumatic brain injury (TBI) and aid in outcome prediction. We aimed to externally validate the NeuroImaging Radiological Interpretation System (NIRIS) and the Helsinki CT score. In addition, we compared the prognostic performance of the NIRIS and the Helsinki CT score to the Marshall CT classification and to a clinical model.

methodsWe conducted a retrospective multicenter observational study using the Finnish Intensive Care Consortium database. We included adult TBI patients admitted in four university hospital ICUs during 2003-2013. We analyzed the CT scans using the NIRIS and the Helsinki CT score and compared the results to 6-month mortality as the primary outcome. In addition, we created a clinical model (age, Glasgow Coma Scale score, Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, presence of severe comorbidity) and combined clinical and CT models to see the added predictive impact of radiological data to conventional clinical information. We measured model performance using area under curve (AUC), Nagelkerke's R

resultsA total of 3031 patients were included in the analysis. The 6-month mortality was 710 patients (23.4%). Of the CT models, the Helsinki CT displayed best discrimination (AUC 0.73 vs. 0.70 for NIRIS) and explanatory variation (Nagelkerke's R

conclusionIn patients with TBI treated in the ICU, the Helsinki CT score outperformed the NIRIS for 6-month mortality prediction. In isolation, CT models offered only moderate accuracy for outcome prediction and clinical variables outweighing the CT-based predictors in terms of predictive performance.

Indexed as

Brain Injuries, TraumaticAdultCritical CareFinlandGlasgow Coma ScaleHumansIntensive Care UnitsNeuroimagingPrognosisRetrospective StudiesTomography, X-Ray ComputedComputed tomographyIntensive careTrauma surgeryTraumatic brain injury

Identifiers

PMID36050580
PMCPMC9519640

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.