DOI 10.1097/00005373-199706000-00021
Outcome analysis of patients with severe head injuries and prolonged intracranial hypertension.
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE
To describe the functional outcome of a select group of patients with severe head injuries who would a priori be assumed to have a dismal outcome and to determine prognostic factors that can be used for effective family counseling and rational utilization of scarce resources.
METHODS
Thirty-seven patients with severe head injuries (admission Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score < 8) with prolonged (> 96 hours) intracranial hypertension were studied. Parameters recorded included admission age, GCS, evidence of prehospital hypotension, initial computed tomography findings, intracranial pressure (ICP), cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP), and therapeutic intensity level.
RESULTS
Thirty-eight percent of patients in this study achieved a Glasgow Outcome Scale score (GOS) of 4 (moderate disability) or better when assessed 1 year after injury. Patients who achieved these good outcomes were significantly younger (mean 23.6 +/- 8.8 years) than patients who were severely disabled or worse (GOS 1-3) (34.3 +/- 15.0 years) (p = 0.0098). The mean admission GCS in the good-outcome group tended to be higher than that of the poor-outcome group (5.8 +/- 1.5 vs 4.8 +/- 1.6, p = 0.065). When patients with good outcomes (GOS 4 or 5) were compared with those with poor outcomes (GOS 1-3), no significant differences in mean or peak ICP, percentage of time intervals with elevated ICP, lowest recorded CPP, or length of ICP monitoring were detected.
CONCLUSION
Younger patients, particularly those with GCS > 5, have the potential for excellent recovery despite prolonged (> 96 hours) intracranial hypertension. These patients will benefit from continued aggressive ICP and CPP management.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.