Applicability of Anatomic and Physiologic Scoring Systems for the Prediction of Outcome in Polytraumatized Patients with Blunt Aortic Injuries.
aortic injury
multiple injured
scoring systems
trauma
Journal
Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)
ISSN: 2075-4418
Titre abrégé: Diagnostics (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101658402
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
21 Nov 2021
21 Nov 2021
Historique:
received:
17
09
2021
revised:
16
11
2021
accepted:
17
11
2021
entrez:
27
11
2021
pubmed:
28
11
2021
medline:
28
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Most patients with blunt aortic injuries, who arrive alive in a clinic, suffer from traumatic pseudoaneurysms. Due to modern treatments, the perioperative mortality has significantly decreased. Therefore, it is unclear how exact the prediction of commonly used scoring systems of the outcome is. We analyzed data on 65 polytraumatized patients with blunt aortic injuries. The following scores were calculated: injury severity score (ISS), new injury severity score (NISS), trauma and injury severity score (TRISS), revised trauma score coded (RTSc) and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE II). Subsequently, their predictive value was evaluated using Spearman´s and Kendall´s correlation analysis, logistic regression and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves. A proportion of 83% of the patients suffered from a thoracic aortic rupture or rupture with concomitant aortic wall dissection (54/65). The overall mortality was 24.6% (16/65). The sensitivity and specificity were calculated as the area under the receiver operating curves (AUC): NISS 0.812, ISS 0.791, APACHE II 0.884, RTSc 0.679 and TRISS 0.761. Logistic regression showed a slightly higher specificity to anatomical scoring systems (ISS 0.959, NISS 0.980, TRISS 0.957, APACHE II 0.938). The sensitivity was highest in the APACHE II with 0.545. Sensitivity and specificity for the RTSc were not significant. The predictive abilities of all scoring systems were very limited. All scoring systems, except the RTSc, had a high specificity but a low sensitivity. In our study population, the RTSc was not applicable. The APACHE II was the most sensitive score for mortality. Anatomical scoring systems showed a positive correlation with the amount of transfused blood products.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Most patients with blunt aortic injuries, who arrive alive in a clinic, suffer from traumatic pseudoaneurysms. Due to modern treatments, the perioperative mortality has significantly decreased. Therefore, it is unclear how exact the prediction of commonly used scoring systems of the outcome is.
METHODS
METHODS
We analyzed data on 65 polytraumatized patients with blunt aortic injuries. The following scores were calculated: injury severity score (ISS), new injury severity score (NISS), trauma and injury severity score (TRISS), revised trauma score coded (RTSc) and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE II). Subsequently, their predictive value was evaluated using Spearman´s and Kendall´s correlation analysis, logistic regression and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A proportion of 83% of the patients suffered from a thoracic aortic rupture or rupture with concomitant aortic wall dissection (54/65). The overall mortality was 24.6% (16/65). The sensitivity and specificity were calculated as the area under the receiver operating curves (AUC): NISS 0.812, ISS 0.791, APACHE II 0.884, RTSc 0.679 and TRISS 0.761. Logistic regression showed a slightly higher specificity to anatomical scoring systems (ISS 0.959, NISS 0.980, TRISS 0.957, APACHE II 0.938). The sensitivity was highest in the APACHE II with 0.545. Sensitivity and specificity for the RTSc were not significant.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The predictive abilities of all scoring systems were very limited. All scoring systems, except the RTSc, had a high specificity but a low sensitivity. In our study population, the RTSc was not applicable. The APACHE II was the most sensitive score for mortality. Anatomical scoring systems showed a positive correlation with the amount of transfused blood products.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34829503
pii: diagnostics11112156
doi: 10.3390/diagnostics11112156
pmc: PMC8617692
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
World J Emerg Surg. 2020 Oct 19;15(1):59
pubmed: 33076958
J Trauma. 1997 Dec;43(6):922-5; discussion 925-6
pubmed: 9420106
Emerg Med J. 2015 Feb;32(2):124-9
pubmed: 24005640
Unfallchirurg. 2005 Apr;108(4):279-87
pubmed: 15856126
Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2019 Apr;38(2):161-167
pubmed: 29476943
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2019 Mar-Apr;23(2):263-270
pubmed: 30118369
J Trauma. 1989 May;29(5):623-9
pubmed: 2657085
Acad Emerg Med. 2004 Feb;11(2):181-6
pubmed: 14759963
J Trauma. 2011 Jan;70(1):197-202
pubmed: 21217494
J Trauma. 1985 Jan;25(1):60-4
pubmed: 3965737
J Visc Surg. 2017 Dec;154 Suppl 1:S19-S29
pubmed: 29055663
Ann Surg. 2014 Jul;260(1):13-21
pubmed: 24651132
J Trauma. 1996 Jun;40(6):944-50
pubmed: 8656481
Injury. 2009 Sep;40(9):993-8
pubmed: 19535054
Circulation. 1958 Jun;17(6):1086-101
pubmed: 13547374
Radiology. 1999 Oct;213(1):195-202
pubmed: 10540662
J Trauma. 1995 Feb;38(2):185-93
pubmed: 7869433
Unfallchirurg. 2017 May;120(5):409-416
pubmed: 26757729
Injury. 2009 Sep;40(9):907-11
pubmed: 19540488
J Trauma. 2006 Feb;60(2):334-40
pubmed: 16508492
J Trauma. 1992 Oct;33(4):504-6; discussion 506-7
pubmed: 1433394
J Trauma. 1987 Apr;27(4):370-8
pubmed: 3106646
J Trauma. 1974 Mar;14(3):187-96
pubmed: 4814394
J Clin Diagn Res. 2015 Jul;9(7):RC01-4
pubmed: 26393173
Ann Clin Lab Sci. 2018 May;48(3):279-285
pubmed: 29970429
Crit Care Med. 1985 Oct;13(10):818-29
pubmed: 3928249
Unfallchirurg. 2020 Sep;123(9):711-723
pubmed: 32140814
J Trauma. 1997 Mar;42(3):374-80; discussion 380-3
pubmed: 9095103
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Oct 02;17(19):
pubmed: 33023234
World J Surg. 2010 Jan;34(1):158-63
pubmed: 19882185
J Trauma. 2006 Sep;61(3):711-7
pubmed: 16967012
J Vasc Surg. 2011 Jan;53(1):187-92
pubmed: 20974523