Transition from classic to expanded Denver screening criteria for blunt cerebrovascular injury: lessons from a high-volume level I trauma center.

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Julia Casado-Ruiz, Ana M Castaño-Leon, Laura García-Escudero, Maria Huerta-Carrascosa, Marta Vidal-Terrancle, Alfonso Lagares
{"title":"Transition from classic to expanded Denver screening criteria for blunt cerebrovascular injury: lessons from a high-volume level I trauma center.","authors":"Julia Casado-Ruiz, Ana M Castaño-Leon, Laura García-Escudero, Maria Huerta-Carrascosa, Marta Vidal-Terrancle, Alfonso Lagares","doi":"10.3171/2024.12.JNS241294","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Blunt cerebrovascular injuries (BCVIs) are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. To identify patients with BCVI who were undetected using the classic criteria, researchers designed the expanded Denver screening criteria. The aim of this study was to evaluate adherence to the classic and expanded screening protocols. The authors then assessed the impact of this transition on the identification of BCVI and the development of ischemic brain injuries.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) admitted to the authors' center between 2014 and 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient characteristics, adherence to the screening protocol, the incidence of BCVI detected by CT angiography (CTA) or digital subtraction angiography, and the development of ischemia in patients admitted before (2014-2018) and after (2019-2021) the implementation of the expanded Denver criteria were compared. Comparisons in qualitative and quantitative variables between periods were performed using the chi-square test and Mann-Whitney U-test, respectively. Which individual criterion was most associated with adherence to the protocol and incidence of BCVI according to multivariate logistic regression analysis was also determined. The performance of each screening protocol was determined using the C-statistic.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 648 patients with TBI identified during the study period, 397 were recruited in the classic period (2014-2018) and 251 in the expanded period (2019-2021). The rate of adherence to the screening protocol was 58.9% in the classic period and 78.1% in the expanded period (p < 0.001). BCVIs were detected in 38 patients (9.6% incidence) in the classic period and 20 patients (8% incidence) in the expanded period. If the classic criteria had been used in the 2019-2021 period, 14 CT angiograms would not have been performed. During the classic period, 27 patients (6.8%) developed ischemia. In 5 (18.5%) of these 27 patients, ischemia could not be prevented because they were not screened through CTA despite fulfilling the criteria. In the expanded period, 24 patients (9.6%) developed ischemia, with no CTA performed in just 1 patient (4.2%), despite meeting the criteria for screening (p = 0.125).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite the improvement in adherence and the enhanced diagnosis of BCVI following training and the implementation of the expanded Denver criteria, the study failed to find a significant reduction in delayed ischemia, while acknowledging the potential for other contributing factors. Further endeavors should be conducted to ensure protocol adherence and early diagnosis of patients at risk of BCVI.</p>","PeriodicalId":16505,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurosurgery","volume":" ","pages":"1-11"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3171/2024.12.JNS241294","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Blunt cerebrovascular injuries (BCVIs) are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. To identify patients with BCVI who were undetected using the classic criteria, researchers designed the expanded Denver screening criteria. The aim of this study was to evaluate adherence to the classic and expanded screening protocols. The authors then assessed the impact of this transition on the identification of BCVI and the development of ischemic brain injuries.

Methods: Patients with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) admitted to the authors' center between 2014 and 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient characteristics, adherence to the screening protocol, the incidence of BCVI detected by CT angiography (CTA) or digital subtraction angiography, and the development of ischemia in patients admitted before (2014-2018) and after (2019-2021) the implementation of the expanded Denver criteria were compared. Comparisons in qualitative and quantitative variables between periods were performed using the chi-square test and Mann-Whitney U-test, respectively. Which individual criterion was most associated with adherence to the protocol and incidence of BCVI according to multivariate logistic regression analysis was also determined. The performance of each screening protocol was determined using the C-statistic.

Results: Of the 648 patients with TBI identified during the study period, 397 were recruited in the classic period (2014-2018) and 251 in the expanded period (2019-2021). The rate of adherence to the screening protocol was 58.9% in the classic period and 78.1% in the expanded period (p < 0.001). BCVIs were detected in 38 patients (9.6% incidence) in the classic period and 20 patients (8% incidence) in the expanded period. If the classic criteria had been used in the 2019-2021 period, 14 CT angiograms would not have been performed. During the classic period, 27 patients (6.8%) developed ischemia. In 5 (18.5%) of these 27 patients, ischemia could not be prevented because they were not screened through CTA despite fulfilling the criteria. In the expanded period, 24 patients (9.6%) developed ischemia, with no CTA performed in just 1 patient (4.2%), despite meeting the criteria for screening (p = 0.125).

Conclusions: Despite the improvement in adherence and the enhanced diagnosis of BCVI following training and the implementation of the expanded Denver criteria, the study failed to find a significant reduction in delayed ischemia, while acknowledging the potential for other contributing factors. Further endeavors should be conducted to ensure protocol adherence and early diagnosis of patients at risk of BCVI.

钝性脑血管损伤从经典到扩展丹佛筛查标准的转变:来自高容量一级创伤中心的经验教训。
目的:钝性脑血管损伤(BCVIs)具有较高的发病率和死亡率。为了识别未使用经典标准检测到的BCVI患者,研究人员设计了扩展的丹佛筛查标准。本研究的目的是评估对经典和扩展筛查方案的依从性。然后,作者评估了这种转变对BCVI识别和缺血性脑损伤发展的影响。方法:回顾性分析2014年至2021年笔者中心收治的中重度创伤性脑损伤(TBI)患者。比较扩展丹佛标准实施前(2014-2018年)和实施后(2019-2021年)住院患者的患者特征、筛查方案的依从性、CT血管造影(CTA)或数字减影血管造影检测BCVI的发生率以及缺血的发展情况。不同时期间定性和定量变量的比较分别采用卡方检验和Mann-Whitney u检验。根据多变量logistic回归分析,确定哪一个体标准与方案依从性和BCVI发病率最相关。使用c统计量确定每种筛选方案的性能。结果:在研究期间确定的648例TBI患者中,397例在经典期(2014-2018年)招募,251例在扩展期(2019-2021年)招募。筛查方案的依从率在经典期为58.9%,扩展期为78.1% (p < 0.001)。经典期38例(9.6%),扩展期20例(8%)检测到BCVIs。如果在2019-2021年期间使用经典标准,则不会进行14次CT血管造影。经典期27例(6.8%)出现缺血。在这27例患者中,有5例(18.5%)由于没有通过CTA筛查而无法预防缺血,尽管他们符合标准。在扩大的时间段内,24例患者(9.6%)出现缺血,尽管符合筛查标准,但仅有1例患者(4.2%)未进行CTA (p = 0.125)。结论:尽管训练后依从性得到改善,BCVI的诊断得到加强,并实施了扩展的丹佛标准,但该研究未能发现延迟性缺血的显著减少,同时承认其他因素的潜在影响。应进一步努力确保方案的遵守和BCVI风险患者的早期诊断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of neurosurgery
Journal of neurosurgery 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
7.30%
发文量
1003
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Neurosurgery, Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics, and Neurosurgical Focus are devoted to the publication of original works relating primarily to neurosurgery, including studies in clinical neurophysiology, organic neurology, ophthalmology, radiology, pathology, and molecular biology. The Editors and Editorial Boards encourage submission of clinical and laboratory studies. Other manuscripts accepted for review include technical notes on instruments or equipment that are innovative or useful to clinicians and researchers in the field of neuroscience; papers describing unusual cases; manuscripts on historical persons or events related to neurosurgery; and in Neurosurgical Focus, occasional reviews. Letters to the Editor commenting on articles recently published in the Journal of Neurosurgery, Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, and Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics are welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信