The modified Brain Injury Guidelines: safe, sensitive, but not yet specific.

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Journal of neurosurgery Pub Date : 2025-07-04 Print Date: 2025-10-01 DOI:10.3171/2025.3.JNS242874
Lindsey M Freeman, Andrew Mecum, Michael W Cripps, Peter J Lennarson
{"title":"The modified Brain Injury Guidelines: safe, sensitive, but not yet specific.","authors":"Lindsey M Freeman, Andrew Mecum, Michael W Cripps, Peter J Lennarson","doi":"10.3171/2025.3.JNS242874","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The modified Brain Injury Guidelines (mBIG) have been determined safe, but statistical analyses are limited to lower-severity mBIG 1 and mBIG 2 populations. The aim of this study was to determine the sensitivity of mBIG criteria for the need for neurosurgical intervention and to evaluate associations between individual mBIG 3 radiographic criteria and need for intervention.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The records of all head trauma patients presenting to a level I trauma center from May 2020 to December 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients without intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) on first CT imaging of the head and those who underwent intervention at an outside hospital were excluded. Radiographic stability versus progression on repeat CT imaging was collected. Clinical outcome measures were neurosurgical intervention, length of stay, and mortality. Patients were sorted based on published mBIG criteria and compared with prior studies reporting on intervention by the Brain Injury Guidelines (BIG) group.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1128 patients with a mean age of 54.9 (SD 21.2) years, 67.7% male, were included. Most patients (69.7%) were in the mBIG 3 group. Ninety-seven patients (8.6%), all in the mBIG 3 cohort, received intervention after initial CT imaging. An additional 113 patients (10.0%) underwent intervention after some period of observation and at least one repeat CT study, of whom 112 were in the mBIG 3 group and 1 was in the mBIG 2 group (0.6% of mBIG 2 patients, 0.5% of those requiring intervention, and 0.09% of the entire study population). mBIG 3 criteria were 99.5% sensitive for the need for neurosurgical intervention. mBIG 2+3 criteria were 100.0% sensitive, consistent with the cumulative literature of all iterations of BIG. Their specificities were 37.2% and 18.1%, respectively. There was no correlation between intervention and anticoagulant/antiplatelet use (p = 0.069). Progression of ICH was associated with intervention within the mBIG 3 cohort (p < 0.001). In post hoc multivariate analysis of mBIG 3 patients with Glasgow Coma Scale scores of 13-15, significant associations were found between each specific mBIG 3 radiographic criterion and intervention, except intraparenchymal hemorrhage (IPH) (p = 0.205) and subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) (p = 0.274).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The mBIG 3 criteria are 99.5% sensitive for the need for neurosurgical intervention. Criteria requiring hospital admission (mBIG 2+3) are 100.0% sensitive. Radiographic mBIG 3 criteria for IPH and SAH alone are poor predictors for the need for neurosurgical intervention in patients with favorable neurological status. The recommendation against routine repeat CT head imaging in mBIG 1 and 2 patients is supported by the findings of this study.</p>","PeriodicalId":16505,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurosurgery","volume":" ","pages":"999-1008"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-04","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/10.3171/2025.3.JNS242874","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The modified Brain Injury Guidelines (mBIG) have been determined safe, but statistical analyses are limited to lower-severity mBIG 1 and mBIG 2 populations. The aim of this study was to determine the sensitivity of mBIG criteria for the need for neurosurgical intervention and to evaluate associations between individual mBIG 3 radiographic criteria and need for intervention.

Methods: The records of all head trauma patients presenting to a level I trauma center from May 2020 to December 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients without intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) on first CT imaging of the head and those who underwent intervention at an outside hospital were excluded. Radiographic stability versus progression on repeat CT imaging was collected. Clinical outcome measures were neurosurgical intervention, length of stay, and mortality. Patients were sorted based on published mBIG criteria and compared with prior studies reporting on intervention by the Brain Injury Guidelines (BIG) group.

Results: A total of 1128 patients with a mean age of 54.9 (SD 21.2) years, 67.7% male, were included. Most patients (69.7%) were in the mBIG 3 group. Ninety-seven patients (8.6%), all in the mBIG 3 cohort, received intervention after initial CT imaging. An additional 113 patients (10.0%) underwent intervention after some period of observation and at least one repeat CT study, of whom 112 were in the mBIG 3 group and 1 was in the mBIG 2 group (0.6% of mBIG 2 patients, 0.5% of those requiring intervention, and 0.09% of the entire study population). mBIG 3 criteria were 99.5% sensitive for the need for neurosurgical intervention. mBIG 2+3 criteria were 100.0% sensitive, consistent with the cumulative literature of all iterations of BIG. Their specificities were 37.2% and 18.1%, respectively. There was no correlation between intervention and anticoagulant/antiplatelet use (p = 0.069). Progression of ICH was associated with intervention within the mBIG 3 cohort (p < 0.001). In post hoc multivariate analysis of mBIG 3 patients with Glasgow Coma Scale scores of 13-15, significant associations were found between each specific mBIG 3 radiographic criterion and intervention, except intraparenchymal hemorrhage (IPH) (p = 0.205) and subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) (p = 0.274).

Conclusions: The mBIG 3 criteria are 99.5% sensitive for the need for neurosurgical intervention. Criteria requiring hospital admission (mBIG 2+3) are 100.0% sensitive. Radiographic mBIG 3 criteria for IPH and SAH alone are poor predictors for the need for neurosurgical intervention in patients with favorable neurological status. The recommendation against routine repeat CT head imaging in mBIG 1 and 2 patients is supported by the findings of this study.

修订后的脑损伤指南:安全、敏感,但尚未具体。
目的:修改后的脑损伤指南(mBIG)已被确定为安全的,但统计分析仅限于较低严重程度的mBIG 1和mBIG 2人群。本研究的目的是确定mBIG标准对神经外科干预需求的敏感性,并评估个体mBIG 3放射学标准与干预需求之间的关系。方法:回顾性分析2020年5月至2023年12月在某一级创伤中心就诊的所有头部创伤患者的记录。排除首次头部CT成像无颅内出血(ICH)的患者和在医院外接受干预的患者。收集影像学稳定性与重复CT成像的进展。临床结果测量为神经外科干预、住院时间和死亡率。根据公布的mBIG标准对患者进行分类,并与先前报道脑损伤指南(BIG)组干预的研究进行比较。结果:共纳入1128例患者,平均年龄54.9岁(SD 21.2),其中67.7%为男性。大多数患者(69.7%)为mBIG 3组。97例(8.6%)mBIG 3队列患者在初始CT成像后接受干预。另外113例患者(10.0%)在经过一段时间的观察和至少一次重复CT研究后接受了干预,其中112例属于mBIG 3组,1例属于mBIG 2组(占mBIG 2患者的0.6%,需要干预的患者的0.5%,占整个研究人群的0.09%)。mBIG 3标准对神经外科干预的敏感性为99.5%。mBIG 2+3标准的敏感性为100.0%,与BIG所有迭代的累积文献一致。特异性分别为37.2%和18.1%。干预与抗凝/抗血小板使用无相关性(p = 0.069)。在mBIG 3队列中,脑出血的进展与干预相关(p < 0.001)。在格拉斯哥昏迷量表评分为13-15分的mBIG 3患者的事后多变量分析中,除了肺内出血(IPH) (p = 0.205)和蛛网膜下腔出血(SAH) (p = 0.274)外,各mBIG 3特定放射学标准与干预之间存在显著关联。结论:mBIG 3标准对神经外科干预的敏感性为99.5%。要求住院的标准(mBIG 2+3)敏感性为100.0%。单纯IPH和SAH的影像学mBIG 3标准不能很好地预测神经系统状况良好的患者是否需要进行神经外科干预。本研究结果支持对mBIG 1型和2型患者不进行常规重复CT头部成像的建议。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信