Predicting lethal outcome risks in patients with craniomaxillofacial trauma and polytrauma by the ISS and NISS

I. Shumynskyi, M. Sabadosh, V. Gurianov, A. Kopchak
{"title":"Predicting lethal outcome risks in patients with craniomaxillofacial trauma and polytrauma by the ISS and NISS","authors":"I. Shumynskyi, M. Sabadosh, V. Gurianov, A. Kopchak","doi":"10.30978/gs-2022-2-13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Multiple papers reveal no reliable difference between early and delayed maxillofacial injuries treatment in postoperative complications in patients with craniomaxillofacial trauma and polytrauma. A choice factor of the treatment tactics is the lethal outcome risk, as well as the lethal outcome prognosis. In order to objectivize the severity of trauma authors suggested the assessment scores which represent patient’s condition severity in points and provide lethal outcome risk estimation, — Injury Severity Score (ISS) and New Injury Severity Score (NISS), each with advantages and disadvantages of prognosing the lethal outcome. Though, the data on its preciseness and informativeness regarding patients with combined craniomaxillofacial trauma are limited, and the results, obtained from various authors, seem to be controversial. \nObjective — to identify and compare the threshold (critical) values of the ISS and NISS assessment scales which predict the lethal outcome risks in patients with craniomaxillofacial trauma and polytrauma. \nMaterials and methods. During 2016 — 2019 years 503 patients were treated due to maxillofacial traumas and associated injuries. Patients age ranged from 18 till 91 years, (average age — 30.5 years). There was a male predominance in the sample (84.3 %). Facial bone fractures occurred in 70 % of cases (352 patients). Mainly after assaults (44 %), falls (20 %) and motor‑vehicle accidents (16 %). The other etiological factors included occupational traumas (0.5 %), sport traumas (1 %) and unknown aetiology traumas. The study evaluated patients with facial and concomitant injuries, who received multidisciplinary treatment in a specialized trauma hospital. Values of Injury Severity Score and New Injury Severity Score were statistically analyzed to evaluate effectiveness in prognosing lethal outcome risks. \nResults. Mortality in the sample was 3 % (15 patients). With the optimum cut‑off value of ISS > 24, lethal outcome prognosis model sensitivity yields 93.3 %, specificity — 91.4 %. With the optimum cut‑off value NISS > 36, the lethal outcome prognosis sensitivity yields 86.7 %, its specificity 92.4 %. \nConclusions. ISS and NISS demonstrate similar effectiveness in prognosing lethal outcome risks. The difference of area under the curve of both trauma severity estimation methods is not statistically significant (р = 0.651). Both indicators could be used in daily practice in specialized hospitals to assess the patient’s condition and determine priority of treatment steps.","PeriodicalId":12661,"journal":{"name":"General Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"General Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30978/gs-2022-2-13","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Multiple papers reveal no reliable difference between early and delayed maxillofacial injuries treatment in postoperative complications in patients with craniomaxillofacial trauma and polytrauma. A choice factor of the treatment tactics is the lethal outcome risk, as well as the lethal outcome prognosis. In order to objectivize the severity of trauma authors suggested the assessment scores which represent patient’s condition severity in points and provide lethal outcome risk estimation, — Injury Severity Score (ISS) and New Injury Severity Score (NISS), each with advantages and disadvantages of prognosing the lethal outcome. Though, the data on its preciseness and informativeness regarding patients with combined craniomaxillofacial trauma are limited, and the results, obtained from various authors, seem to be controversial. Objective — to identify and compare the threshold (critical) values of the ISS and NISS assessment scales which predict the lethal outcome risks in patients with craniomaxillofacial trauma and polytrauma. Materials and methods. During 2016 — 2019 years 503 patients were treated due to maxillofacial traumas and associated injuries. Patients age ranged from 18 till 91 years, (average age — 30.5 years). There was a male predominance in the sample (84.3 %). Facial bone fractures occurred in 70 % of cases (352 patients). Mainly after assaults (44 %), falls (20 %) and motor‑vehicle accidents (16 %). The other etiological factors included occupational traumas (0.5 %), sport traumas (1 %) and unknown aetiology traumas. The study evaluated patients with facial and concomitant injuries, who received multidisciplinary treatment in a specialized trauma hospital. Values of Injury Severity Score and New Injury Severity Score were statistically analyzed to evaluate effectiveness in prognosing lethal outcome risks. Results. Mortality in the sample was 3 % (15 patients). With the optimum cut‑off value of ISS > 24, lethal outcome prognosis model sensitivity yields 93.3 %, specificity — 91.4 %. With the optimum cut‑off value NISS > 36, the lethal outcome prognosis sensitivity yields 86.7 %, its specificity 92.4 %. Conclusions. ISS and NISS demonstrate similar effectiveness in prognosing lethal outcome risks. The difference of area under the curve of both trauma severity estimation methods is not statistically significant (р = 0.651). Both indicators could be used in daily practice in specialized hospitals to assess the patient’s condition and determine priority of treatment steps.
通过ISS和NISS预测颅颌面创伤和多发创伤患者的致命结局风险
多篇论文显示,颅颌面外伤和多发外伤患者术后并发症的早期和延迟颌面损伤治疗没有可靠的差异。治疗策略的选择因素是致死性结局风险,以及致死性结局预后。为了客观评价创伤的严重程度,作者提出了代表患者病情严重程度并提供致死性结局风险估计的评估评分——损伤严重程度评分(ISS)和新损伤严重程度评分(NISS),它们各自具有预测致死性结局的优点和缺点。然而,关于颅颌面联合创伤患者的准确性和信息量的数据是有限的,并且从不同作者获得的结果似乎是有争议的。目的-识别和比较预测颅颌面外伤和多发外伤患者致命结局风险的ISS和NISS评估量表的阈值(临界值)。材料和方法。2016 - 2019年间,503例患者因颌面部创伤及相关损伤接受了治疗。患者年龄18 ~ 91岁(平均年龄- 30.5岁)。样本中存在男性优势(84.3%)。352例(70%)发生面骨骨折。主要发生在袭击(44%)、跌倒(20%)和机动车事故(16%)之后。其他病因包括职业创伤(0.5%)、运动创伤(1%)和未知病因。该研究评估了在创伤专科医院接受多学科治疗的面部及伴发损伤患者。对损伤严重程度评分(Injury Severity Score)和新损伤严重程度评分(New Injury Severity Score)的值进行统计分析,以评估对预后致死结局风险的有效性。结果。样本死亡率为3%(15例)。当最佳截断值ISS > 24时,致死性预后模型敏感性为93.3%,特异性为91.4%。当最佳截断值NISS > 36时,致死性预后敏感性为86.7%,特异性为92.4%。结论。ISS和NISS在预测致命结局风险方面显示出相似的有效性。两种创伤严重程度估计方法的曲线下面积差异无统计学意义(χ = 0.651)。这两项指标均可用于专科医院的日常实践中,以评估患者的病情并确定优先治疗步骤。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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