| 1. |
- van Essen, Thomas A, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparative effectiveness of decompressive craniectomy versus craniotomy for traumatic acute subdural hematoma (CENTER-TBI) : an observational cohort study
- 2023
-
Ingår i: eClinicalMedicine. - : Elsevier. - 2589-5370. ; 63
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Limited evidence existed on the comparative effectiveness of decompressive craniectomy (DC) versus craniotomy for evacuation of traumatic acute subdural hematoma (ASDH) until the recently published randomised clinical trial RESCUE-ASDH. In this study, that ran concurrently, we aimed to determine current practice patterns and compare outcomes of primary DC versus craniotomy.METHODS: We conducted an analysis of centre treatment preference within the prospective, multicentre, observational Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (known as CENTER-TBI) and NeuroTraumatology Quality Registry (known as Net-QuRe) studies, which enrolled patients throughout Europe and Israel (2014-2020). We included patients with an ASDH who underwent acute neurosurgical evacuation. Patients with severe pre-existing neurological disorders were excluded. In an instrumental variable analysis, we compared outcomes between centres according to treatment preference, measured by the case-mix adjusted proportion DC per centre. The primary outcome was functional outcome rated by the 6-months Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended, estimated with ordinal regression as a common odds ratio (OR), adjusted for prespecified confounders. Variation in centre preference was quantified with the median odds ratio (MOR). CENTER-TBI is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02210221, and the Resource Identification Portal (Research Resource Identifier SCR_015582).FINDINGS: Between December 19, 2014 and December 17, 2017, 4559 patients with traumatic brain injury were enrolled in CENTER-TBI of whom 336 (7%) underwent acute surgery for ASDH evacuation; 91 (27%) underwent DC and 245 (63%) craniotomy. The proportion primary DC within total acute surgery cases ranged from 6 to 67% with an interquartile range (IQR) of 12-26% among 46 centres; the odds of receiving a DC for prognostically similar patients in one centre versus another randomly selected centre were trebled (adjusted median odds ratio 2.7, p < 0.0001). Higher centre preference for DC over craniotomy was not associated with better functional outcome (adjusted common odds ratio (OR) per 14% [IQR increase] more DC in a centre = 0.9 [95% CI 0.7-1.1], n = 200). Primary DC was associated with more follow-on surgeries and complications [secondary cranial surgery 27% vs. 18%; shunts 11 vs. 5%]; and similar odds of in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR per 14% IQR more primary DC 1.3 [95% CI (1.0-3.4), n = 200]).INTERPRETATION: We found substantial practice variation in the employment of DC over craniotomy for ASDH. This variation in treatment strategy did not result in different functional outcome. These findings suggest that primary DC should be restricted to salvageable patients in whom immediate replacement of the bone flap is not possible due to intraoperative brain swelling.FUNDING: Hersenstichting Nederland for the Dutch NeuroTraumatology Quality Registry and the European Union Seventh Framework Program.
|
|
| 2. |
- van Essen, Thomas A., et al.
(författare)
-
Surgery versus conservative treatment for traumatic acute subdural haematoma : a prospective, multicentre, observational, comparative effectiveness study
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Lancet Neurology. - : Elsevier. - 1474-4422 .- 1474-4465. ; 21:7, s. 620-631
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Despite being well established, acute surgery in traumatic acute subdural haematoma is based on low-grade evidence. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of a strategy preferring acute surgical evacuation with one preferring initial conservative treatment in acute subdural haematoma.METHODS: We did a prospective, observational, comparative effectiveness study using data from participants enrolled in the Collaborative European Neurotrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) cohort. We included patients with no pre-existing severe neurological disorders who presented with acute subdural haematoma within 24 h of traumatic brain injury. Using an instrumental variable analysis, we compared outcomes between centres according to treatment preference for acute subdural haematoma (acute surgical evacuation or initial conservative treatment), measured by the case-mix-adjusted percentage of acute surgery per centre. The primary endpoint was functional outcome at 6 months as rated with the Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended, which was estimated with ordinal regression as a common odds ratio (OR) and adjusted for prespecified confounders. Variation in centre preference was quantified with the median OR (MOR). CENTER-TBI is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02210221, and the Resource Identification Portal (Research Resource Identifier SCR_015582).FINDINGS: Between Dec 19, 2014 and Dec 17, 2017, 4559 patients with traumatic brain injury were enrolled in CENTER-TBI, of whom 1407 (31%) presented with acute subdural haematoma and were included in our study. Acute surgical evacuation was done in 336 (24%) patients, by craniotomy in 245 (73%) of those patients and by decompressive craniectomy in 91 (27%). Delayed decompressive craniectomy or craniotomy after initial conservative treatment (n=982) occurred in 107 (11%) patients. The percentage of patients who underwent acute surgery ranged from 5·6% to 51·5% (IQR 12·3-35·9) between centres, with a two-times higher probability of receiving acute surgery for an identical patient in one centre versus another centre at random (adjusted MOR for acute surgery 1·8; p<0·0001]). Centre preference for acute surgery over initial conservative treatment was not associated with improvements in functional outcome (common OR per 23·6% [IQR increase] more acute surgery in a centre 0·92, 95% CI 0·77-1·09).INTERPRETATION: Our findings show that treatment for patients with acute subdural haematoma with similar characteristics differed depending on the treating centre, because of variation in the preferred approach. A treatment strategy preferring an aggressive approach of acute surgical evacuation over initial conservative treatment was not associated with better functional outcome. Therefore, in a patient with acute subdural haematoma for whom a neurosurgeon sees no clear superiority for acute surgery over conservative treatment, initial conservative treatment might be considered.FUNDING: The Hersenstichting Nederland (also known as the Dutch Brain Foundation), the European Commission Seventh Framework Programme, the Hannelore Kohl Stiftung (Germany), OneMind (USA), Integra LifeSciences Corporation (USA), and NeuroTrauma Sciences (USA).
|
|
| 3. |
- Yuh, Esther L, et al.
(författare)
-
Pathological computed tomography features associated with adverse outcomes after mild traumatic brain injury : A TRACK-TBI study with external validation in CENTER-TBI.
- 2021
-
Ingår i: JAMA Neurology. - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 2168-6149 .- 2168-6157. ; 78:9, s. 1137-1148
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- IMPORTANCE: A head computed tomography (CT) with positive results for acute intracranial hemorrhage is the gold-standard diagnostic biomarker for acute traumatic brain injury (TBI). In moderate to severe TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] scores 3-12), some CT features have been shown to be associated with outcomes. In mild TBI (mTBI; GCS scores 13-15), distribution and co-occurrence of pathological CT features and their prognostic importance are not well understood.OBJECTIVE: To identify pathological CT features associated with adverse outcomes after mTBI.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The longitudinal, observational Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury (TRACK-TBI) study enrolled patients with TBI, including those 17 years and older with GCS scores of 13 to 15 who presented to emergency departments at 18 US level 1 trauma centers between February 26, 2014, and August 8, 2018, and underwent head CT imaging within 24 hours of TBI. Evaluations of CT imaging used TBI Common Data Elements. Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE) scores were assessed at 2 weeks and 3, 6, and 12 months postinjury. External validation of results was performed via the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. Data analyses were completed from February 2020 to February 2021.EXPOSURES: Acute nonpenetrating head trauma.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Frequency, co-occurrence, and clustering of CT features; incomplete recovery (GOSE scores <8 vs 8); and an unfavorable outcome (GOSE scores <5 vs ≥5) at 2 weeks and 3, 6, and 12 months.RESULTS: In 1935 patients with mTBI (mean [SD] age, 41.5 [17.6] years; 1286 men [66.5%]) in the TRACK-TBI cohort and 2594 patients with mTBI (mean [SD] age, 51.8 [20.3] years; 1658 men [63.9%]) in an external validation cohort, hierarchical cluster analysis identified 3 major clusters of CT features: contusion, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and/or subdural hematoma; intraventricular and/or petechial hemorrhage; and epidural hematoma. Contusion, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and/or subdural hematoma features were associated with incomplete recovery (odds ratios [ORs] for GOSE scores <8 at 1 year: TRACK-TBI, 1.80 [95% CI, 1.39-2.33]; CENTER-TBI, 2.73 [95% CI, 2.18-3.41]) and greater degrees of unfavorable outcomes (ORs for GOSE scores <5 at 1 year: TRACK-TBI, 3.23 [95% CI, 1.59-6.58]; CENTER-TBI, 1.68 [95% CI, 1.13-2.49]) out to 12 months after injury, but epidural hematoma was not. Intraventricular and/or petechial hemorrhage was associated with greater degrees of unfavorable outcomes up to 12 months after injury (eg, OR for GOSE scores <5 at 1 year in TRACK-TBI: 3.47 [95% CI, 1.66-7.26]). Some CT features were more strongly associated with outcomes than previously validated variables (eg, ORs for GOSE scores <5 at 1 year in TRACK-TBI: neuropsychiatric history, 1.43 [95% CI .98-2.10] vs contusion, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and/or subdural hematoma, 3.23 [95% CI 1.59-6.58]). Findings were externally validated in 2594 patients with mTBI enrolled in the CENTER-TBI study.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this study, pathological CT features carried different prognostic implications after mTBI to 1 year postinjury. Some patterns of injury were associated with worse outcomes than others. These results support that patients with mTBI and these CT features need TBI-specific education and systematic follow-up.
|
|
| 4. |
- Ceyisakar, Iris E., et al.
(författare)
-
Can We Cluster ICU Treatment Strategies for Traumatic Brain Injury by Hospital Treatment Preferences?
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Neurocritical Care. - : Springer. - 1541-6933 .- 1556-0961. ; 36:3, s. 846-856
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: In traumatic brain injury (TBI), large between-center differences in treatment and outcome for patients managed in the intensive care unit (ICU) have been shown. The aim of this study is to explore if European neurotrauma centers can be clustered, based on their treatment preference in different domains of TBI care in the ICU.METHODS: Provider profiles of centers participating in the Collaborative European Neurotrauma Effectiveness Research in TBI study were used to assess correlations within and between the predefined domains: intracranial pressure monitoring, coagulation and transfusion, surgery, prophylactic antibiotics, and more general ICU treatment policies. Hierarchical clustering using Ward's minimum variance method was applied to group data with the highest similarity. Heat maps were used to visualize whether hospitals could be grouped to uncover types of hospitals adhering to certain treatment strategies.RESULTS: Provider profiles were available from 66 centers in 20 different countries in Europe and Israel. Correlations within most of the predefined domains varied from low to high correlations (mean correlation coefficients 0.2-0.7). Correlations between domains were lower, with mean correlation coefficients of 0.2. Cluster analysis showed that policies could be grouped, but hospitals could not be grouped based on their preference.CONCLUSIONS: Although correlations between treatment policies within domains were found, the failure to cluster hospitals indicates that a specific treatment choice within a domain is not a proxy for other treatment choices within or outside the domain. These results imply that studying the effects of specific TBI interventions on outcome can be based on between-center variation without being substantially confounded by other treatments.TRIAL REGISTRATION: We do not report the results of a health care intervention.
|
|
| 5. |
- Cnossen, Maryse C., et al.
(författare)
-
Prehospital Trauma Care among 68 European Neurotrauma Centers : Results of the CENTER-TBI Provider Profiling Questionnaires
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Journal of Neurotrauma. - : Mary Ann Liebert. - 0897-7151 .- 1557-9042. ; 36:1, s. 176-181
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The first hour following traumatic brain injury (TBI) is considered crucial to prevent death and disability. It is, however, not established yet how the prehospital care should be organized to optimize recovery during the first hour. The objective of the current study was to examine variation in prehospital trauma care across Europe aiming to inform comparative effectiveness analyses on care for neurotrauma patients. A survey on prehospital trauma care was sent to 68 neurotrauma centers from 20 European countries participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in TBI (CENTER-TBI) study. The survey was developed using literature review and expert opinion and was pilot tested in 16 centers. All participants completed the questionnaire. Advanced life support was used in half of the centers (n = 35; 52%), whereas the other centers used mainly basic life support (n = 26; 38%). A mobile medical team (MMT) could be dispatched 24/7 in most centers (n = 66; 97%). Helicopters were used in approximately half of the centers to transport the MMT to the scene (n = 39; 57%) and the patient to the hospital (n = 31, 46%). Half of the centers used a stay-and-play approach at the scene (n = 37; 55%), while the others used a scoop-and-run approach or another policy. We found wide variation in prehospital trauma care across Europe. This may reflect differences in socio-economic situations, geographic differences, and a general lack of strong evidence for some aspects of prehospital care. The current variation provides the opportunity to study the effectiveness of prehospital interventions and systems of care in comparative effectiveness research.
|
|
| 6. |
- Cnossen, Maryse C., et al.
(författare)
-
Rehabilitation after traumatic brain injury : A survey in 70 European neurotrauma centres participating in the CENTER-TBI study
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine. - : Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine. - 1650-1977 .- 1651-2081. ; 49:5, s. 395-401
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: To describe variation in structural and process characteristics of acute in-hospital rehabilitation and referral to post-acute care for patients with traumatic brain injury across Europe.DESIGN: Survey study, of neurotrauma centres.METHODS: A 14-item survey about in-hospital rehabilitation and referral to post-acute care was sent to 71 neurotrauma centres participating in a European multicentre study (CENTER-TBI). The questionnaire was developed based on literature and expert opinion and was pilot-tested before sending out to the centres.RESULTS: Seventy (99%) centres in 20 countries completed the survey. The included centres were predominately academic level I trauma centres. Among the 70 centres, a multidisciplinary rehabilitation team can be consulted at 41% (n = 29) of the intensive care units and 49% (n = 34) of the wards. Only 13 (19%) centres used rehabilitation guidelines in patients with traumatic brain injury. Age was reported as a major determinant of referral decisions in 32 (46%) centres, with younger patients usually referred to specialized rehabilitation centres, and patients ≥ 65 years also referred to nursing homes or local hospitals.CONCLUSION: Substantial variation exists in structural and process characteristics of in-hospital acute rehabilitation and referral to post-acute rehabilitation facilities among neurotrauma centres across Europe.
|
|
| 7. |
- Cnossen, Maryse C., et al.
(författare)
-
Variation in Structure and Process of Care in Traumatic Brain Injury : Provider Profiles of European Neurotrauma Centers Participating in the CENTER-TBI Study
- 2016
-
Ingår i: PLOS ONE. - : Public Library of Science (PLOS). - 1932-6203. ; 11:8
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- INTRODUCTION: The strength of evidence underpinning care and treatment recommendations in traumatic brain injury (TBI) is low. Comparative effectiveness research (CER) has been proposed as a framework to provide evidence for optimal care for TBI patients. The first step in CER is to map the existing variation. The aim of current study is to quantify variation in general structural and process characteristics among centers participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study.METHODS: We designed a set of 11 provider profiling questionnaires with 321 questions about various aspects of TBI care, chosen based on literature and expert opinion. After pilot testing, questionnaires were disseminated to 71 centers from 20 countries participating in the CENTER-TBI study. Reliability of questionnaires was estimated by calculating a concordance rate among 5% duplicate questions.RESULTS: All 71 centers completed the questionnaires. Median concordance rate among duplicate questions was 0.85. The majority of centers were academic hospitals (n = 65, 92%), designated as a level I trauma center (n = 48, 68%) and situated in an urban location (n = 70, 99%). The availability of facilities for neuro-trauma care varied across centers; e.g. 40 (57%) had a dedicated neuro-intensive care unit (ICU), 36 (51%) had an in-hospital rehabilitation unit and the organization of the ICU was closed in 64% (n = 45) of the centers. In addition, we found wide variation in processes of care, such as the ICU admission policy and intracranial pressure monitoring policy among centers.CONCLUSION: Even among high-volume, specialized neurotrauma centers there is substantial variation in structures and processes of TBI care. This variation provides an opportunity to study effectiveness of specific aspects of TBI care and to identify best practices with CER approaches.
|
|
| 8. |
- Dijkland, Simone A., et al.
(författare)
-
Outcome Prediction after Moderate and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury : External Validation of Two Established Prognostic Models in 1742 European Patients
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Journal of Neurotrauma. - : Mary Ann Liebert. - 0897-7151 .- 1557-9042. ; 38:10, s. 1377-1388
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The International Mission on Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials in Traumatic Brain Injury (IMPACT) and Corticoid Randomisation After Significant Head injury (CRASH) prognostic models predict functional outcome after moderate and severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). We aimed to assess their performance in a contemporary cohort of patients across Europe. The Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) core study is a prospective, observational cohort study in patients presenting with TBI and an indication for brain computed tomography. The CENTER-TBI core cohort consists of 4509 TBI patients available for analyses from 59 centers in 18 countries across Europe and Israel. The IMPACT validation cohort included 1173 patients with GCS ≤12, age ≥14, and 6-month Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE) available. The CRASH validation cohort contained 1742 patients with GCS ≤14, age ≥16, and 14-day mortality or 6-month GOSE available. Performance of the three IMPACT and two CRASH model variants was assessed with discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve; AUC) and calibration (comparison of observed vs. predicted outcome rates). For IMPACT, model discrimination was good, with AUCs ranging between 0.77 and 0.85 in 1173 patients and between 0.80 and 0.88 in the broader CRASH selection (n = 1742). For CRASH, AUCs ranged between 0.82 and 0.88 in 1742 patients and between 0.66 and 0.80 in the stricter IMPACT selection (n = 1173). Calibration of the IMPACT and CRASH models was generally moderate, with calibration-in-the-large and calibration slopes ranging between -2.02 and 0.61 and between 0.48 and 1.39, respectively. The IMPACT and CRASH models adequately identify patients at high risk for mortality or unfavorable outcome, which supports their use in research settings and for benchmarking in the context of quality-of-care assessment.
|
|
| 9. |
- Feng, Junfeng, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparison of Care System and Treatment Approaches for Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury in China versus Europe : A CENTER-TBI Survey Study
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Journal of Neurotrauma. - : Mary Ann Liebert. - 0897-7151 .- 1557-9042. ; 37:16, s. 1806-1817
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Traumatic brain injury (TBI) poses a huge public health and societal problem worldwide. Uncertainty exists on how care system and treatment approaches for TBI worked in China may differ from those in Europe. Better knowledge on this is important to facilitate interpretation of findings reported by Chinese researchers and to inform opportunities for collaborative studies. We aimed to investigate concordance and variations in TBI care between Chinese and European neurotrauma centers. Investigators from 52 centers in China and 68 in Europe involved in the Collaborative European Neuro Trauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study were invited to complete provider profiling (PP) questionnaires, which covered the main aspects of care system and treatment approaches of TBI care. Participating Chinese and European centers were mainly publicly funded and academic. More centers in China indicated available dedicated neuro-intensive care than those in Europe (98% vs. 60%), and treatment decisions in the ICU were mainly determined by neurosurgeons (58%) in China while in Europe, (neuro)intensivists often took the lead (61%). The ambulance dispatching system was automatic in half of Chinese centers (49%), whereas selective dispatching was more common in European centers (74%). For treatment of refractory intracranial hypertension, a decompressive craniectomy was more frequently regarded as general policy in China compared with in Europe (89% vs. 45%). We observed both concordance and substantial variations with regard to the various aspects of TBI care between Chinese and European centers. These findings are fundamental to guide future research and offer opportunities for collaborative comparative effectiveness research to identify best practices.
|
|
| 10. |
- Foks, Kelly A., et al.
(författare)
-
Management of mild traumatic brain injury at the emergency department and hospital admission in Europe : A survey of 71 neurotrauma centers participating in the CENTER-TBI study
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Journal of Neurotrauma. - : Mary Ann Liebert. - 0897-7151 .- 1557-9042. ; 34:17, s. 2529-2535
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Previous studies have indicated that there is no consensus about management of mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) at the emergency department (ED) and during hospital admission. We aim to study variability between management policies for TBI patients at the ED and hospital ward across Europe. Centers participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study received questionnaires about different phases of TBI care. These questionnaires included 71 questions about TBI management at the ED and at the hospital ward. We found differences in how centers defined mTBI. For example, 40 centers (59%) defined mTBI as a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score between 13-15 and 26 (38%) as a GCS score between 14-15. At the ED various guidelines for the use of head CT in mTBI patients were used; 32 centers (49%) used national guidelines, 10 centers (15%) local guidelines and 14 centers (21%) used no guidelines at all. Also differences in indication for admission between centers were found. After ED discharge, 7 centers (10%) scheduled a routine follow-up appointment, while 38 (54%) did so only after ward admission. In conclusion, large between-center variation exists in policies for diagnostics, admission and discharge decisions in patients with mTBI at the ED and in hospital. Guidelines are not always operational in centers, and reported policies systematically diverge from what is recommended in those guidelines. The results of this study may be useful in the understanding of mTBI care in Europe and show the need for further studies on the effectiveness of different policies on outcome.
|
|
