外伤性脑损伤后功能预后的预测:叙述性回顾。

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Carolina Iaquaniello, Emanuela Scordo, Chiara Robba
{"title":"外伤性脑损伤后功能预后的预测:叙述性回顾。","authors":"Carolina Iaquaniello, Emanuela Scordo, Chiara Robba","doi":"10.1097/MCC.0000000000001290","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>To synthesize current evidence on prognostic factors, tools, and strategies influencing functional outcomes in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI), with a focus on the acute and postacute phases of care.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Key early predictors such as Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) scores, pupillary reactivity, and computed tomography (CT) imaging findings remain fundamental in guiding clinical decision-making. Prognostic models like IMPACT and CRASH enhance early risk stratification, while outcome measures such as the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOS-E) provide structured long-term assessments. Despite their utility, heterogeneity in assessment approaches and treatment protocols continues to limit consistency in outcome predictions. Recent advancements highlight the value of fluid biomarkers like neurofilament light chain (NFL) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), which offer promising avenues for improved accuracy. Additionally, artificial intelligence models are emerging as powerful tools to integrate complex datasets and refine individualized outcome forecasting.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>Neurological prognostication after TBI is evolving through the integration of clinical, radiological, molecular, and computational data. Although standardized models and scales remain foundational, emerging technologies and therapies - such as biomarkers, machine learning, and neurostimulants - represent a shift toward more personalized and actionable strategies to optimize recovery and long-term function.</p>","PeriodicalId":10851,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Critical Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prediction of functional outcome after traumatic brain injury: a narrative review.\",\"authors\":\"Carolina Iaquaniello, Emanuela Scordo, Chiara Robba\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/MCC.0000000000001290\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>To synthesize current evidence on prognostic factors, tools, and strategies influencing functional outcomes in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI), with a focus on the acute and postacute phases of care.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Key early predictors such as Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) scores, pupillary reactivity, and computed tomography (CT) imaging findings remain fundamental in guiding clinical decision-making. Prognostic models like IMPACT and CRASH enhance early risk stratification, while outcome measures such as the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOS-E) provide structured long-term assessments. Despite their utility, heterogeneity in assessment approaches and treatment protocols continues to limit consistency in outcome predictions. Recent advancements highlight the value of fluid biomarkers like neurofilament light chain (NFL) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), which offer promising avenues for improved accuracy. Additionally, artificial intelligence models are emerging as powerful tools to integrate complex datasets and refine individualized outcome forecasting.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>Neurological prognostication after TBI is evolving through the integration of clinical, radiological, molecular, and computational data. Although standardized models and scales remain foundational, emerging technologies and therapies - such as biomarkers, machine learning, and neurostimulants - represent a shift toward more personalized and actionable strategies to optimize recovery and long-term function.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10851,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Opinion in Critical Care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Opinion in Critical Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCC.0000000000001290\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Critical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCC.0000000000001290","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

综述的目的:综合目前关于影响创伤性脑损伤(TBI)患者功能结局的预后因素、工具和策略的证据,重点关注急性期和急性期后的护理。近期发现:关键的早期预测指标,如格拉斯哥昏迷量表(GCS)评分、瞳孔反应性和计算机断层扫描(CT)成像结果仍然是指导临床决策的基础。IMPACT和CRASH等预后模型加强了早期风险分层,而格拉斯哥结局量表扩展(GOS-E)等结果测量提供了结构化的长期评估。尽管它们很有用,但评估方法和治疗方案的异质性仍然限制了结果预测的一致性。最近的进展突出了流体生物标志物的价值,如神经丝轻链(NFL)和胶质纤维酸性蛋白(GFAP),它们为提高准确性提供了有希望的途径。此外,人工智能模型正在成为整合复杂数据集和细化个性化结果预测的强大工具。摘要:创伤性脑损伤后的神经预后正在通过临床、放射学、分子和计算数据的整合而发展。尽管标准化模型和尺度仍然是基础,但新兴技术和疗法——如生物标志物、机器学习和神经兴奋剂——代表着向更加个性化和可操作的策略的转变,以优化恢复和长期功能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Prediction of functional outcome after traumatic brain injury: a narrative review.

Purpose of review: To synthesize current evidence on prognostic factors, tools, and strategies influencing functional outcomes in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI), with a focus on the acute and postacute phases of care.

Recent findings: Key early predictors such as Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) scores, pupillary reactivity, and computed tomography (CT) imaging findings remain fundamental in guiding clinical decision-making. Prognostic models like IMPACT and CRASH enhance early risk stratification, while outcome measures such as the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOS-E) provide structured long-term assessments. Despite their utility, heterogeneity in assessment approaches and treatment protocols continues to limit consistency in outcome predictions. Recent advancements highlight the value of fluid biomarkers like neurofilament light chain (NFL) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), which offer promising avenues for improved accuracy. Additionally, artificial intelligence models are emerging as powerful tools to integrate complex datasets and refine individualized outcome forecasting.

Summary: Neurological prognostication after TBI is evolving through the integration of clinical, radiological, molecular, and computational data. Although standardized models and scales remain foundational, emerging technologies and therapies - such as biomarkers, machine learning, and neurostimulants - represent a shift toward more personalized and actionable strategies to optimize recovery and long-term function.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Current Opinion in Critical Care
Current Opinion in Critical Care 医学-危重病医学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
3.00%
发文量
172
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: ​​​​​​​​​Current Opinion in Critical Care delivers a broad-based perspective on the most recent and most exciting developments in critical care from across the world. Published bimonthly and featuring thirteen key topics – including the respiratory system, neuroscience, trauma and infectious diseases – the journal’s renowned team of guest editors ensure a balanced, expert assessment of the recently published literature in each respective field with insightful editorials and on-the-mark invited reviews.
×
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