切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"
高级检索
中华神经创伤外科电子杂志

中华神经创伤外科电子杂志 ›› 2024, Vol. 10 ›› Issue (02) : 78 -83. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-9141.2024.02.003

临床研究

重型创伤性脑损伤患者术后慢性意识障碍的危险因素及其预测价值
王如海1, 韩超1, 于强1, 胡海成1,†(), 孙菲琳1, 杨震1   
  1. 1. 236063　阜阳，阜阳师范大学附属第二医院（阜阳市第五人民医院）神经外科
  • 收稿日期:2023-03-15 出版日期:2024-04-15
  • 通信作者: 胡海成

Risk factors and predictive value of postoperative prolonged disorders of consciousness in patients with severe traumatic brain injury

Ruhai Wang1, Chao Han1, Qiang Yu1, Haicheng Hu1,†(), Feilin Sun1, Zhen Yang1   

  1. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Fuyang Normal University (Fuyang Fifth People's Hospital), Fuyang 236063, China
  • Received:2023-03-15 Published:2024-04-15
  • Corresponding author: Haicheng Hu
  • Supported by:
    Foundation of Fuyang Health Commission(FY2021-081, FY2023-019)
全文 ( ) 下载PDF ( ) 导出引用
引用本文：

王如海, 韩超, 于强, 胡海成, 孙菲琳, 杨震. 重型创伤性脑损伤患者术后慢性意识障碍的危险因素及其预测价值[J]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2024, 10(02): 78-83.

Ruhai Wang, Chao Han, Qiang Yu, Haicheng Hu, Feilin Sun, Zhen Yang. Risk factors and predictive value of postoperative prolonged disorders of consciousness in patients with severe traumatic brain injury[J]. Chinese Journal of Neurotraumatic Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 10(02): 78-83.

目的

探讨重型创伤性脑损伤（sTBI）患者术后慢性意识障碍（pDoC）的危险因素及其预测价值。

方法

回顾性分析阜阳师范大学附属第二医院神经外科自2018年1月至2022年12月收治的179例手术治疗的sTBI患者的临床资料，根据术后昏迷时间是否超过28 d，将患者分为pDoC组（≥28 d）和非pDoC组（<28 d）。采用单因素及多因素Logistic回归分析，揭示sTBI患者术后pDoC形成的危险因素，采用受试者工作特征（ROC）曲线分析危险因素对pDoC的预测价值。

结果

179例sTBI患者中，60例发生pDoC，发生率为33.5%。pDoC组与非pDoC组的年龄、脑疝、创伤性脑室出血、GCS评分、去骨瓣减压、术后并发症[创伤性脑梗死（PTCI）、创伤性硬膜下积液、应激性溃疡、阵发性交感神经过度兴奋综合征（PSH）、慢性脑积水（HCP）]比较，差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。多因素Logistic回归分析显示，年龄（OR=1.087，95%CI：1.039~1.138，P<0.001）、GCS评分（OR=0.664，95%CI：0.450~0.980，P=0.039）、PTCI（OR=0.049，95%CI：0.004~0.581，P=0.017）、PSH(OR=0.006，95%CI：0.000~0.104，P<0.001)、慢性HCP（OR=0.083，95%CI：0.011~0.604，P=0.014）是pDoC形成的独立危险因素。年龄、GCS评分、PTCI、PSH及慢性HCP预测pDoC的曲线下面积（AUC）分别为0.597（截断值为69岁）、0.824（截断值为5分）、0.612、0.642、0.667，联合预测发生pDoC的AUC为0.938（95%CI：0.892~0.969，P<0.001）。

结论

高龄（>69岁）、GCS评分低（≤5分）、PTCI、PSH、慢性HCP是sTBI患者术后发生pDoC的独立危险因素，联合应用对pDoC的发生具有较好的预测价值。

关键词: 重型创伤性脑损伤, 慢性意识障碍, 危险因素, 预测, 神经外科手术
Objective

To investigate the risk factors of postoperative prolonged disorders of consciousness (pDoC) in patients with severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) and to analyze their predictive value.

Methods

Clinical data of 179 patients with sTBI underwent surgery admitted to Neurosurgery Department of The Second Affiliated Hospital of Fuyang Normal University from January 2018 to December 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into the group of pDoC (≥28 d) and the group of non-pDoC (<28 d), according to whether the duration of coma was at least 28 d after sugery. Univariate and multivariate binary Logistic regression analysis were applied to analyze the independent risk factors for pDoC. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to investigate the predictive value of the risk factors for pDoC.

Results

Of these 179 patients with sTBI, 60 patients suffered from pDoC, and the incidence rate was 33.5%. Age, cerebral herniation, traumatic ventricular hemorrhage, GCS score, decompressive craniectomy, postoperative complications [traumatic cerebral infarction (PTCI), traumatic subdural effusion, stress ulcers, paroxysmal sympathetic hyperactivity (PSH), and chronic hydrocephalus (HCP)] were compared between the pDoC group and the non-pDoC group, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). Multivariate binary Logistic regression analysis showed that age (OR =1.087, 95%CI: 1.039-1.138, P<0.001), GCS score (OR=0.664, 95%CI: 0.450-0.980, P=0.039), PTCI (OR=0.049, 95%CI: 0.004-0.581, P=0.017), PSH (OR=0.006, 95%CI: 0.000-0.104, P<0.001), chronic HCP (OR=0.083, 95%CI: 0.011-0.604, P=0.014) were independent risk factors for the formation of pDoC. The areas under the curve (AUC) of those independent risk factors were 0.597 (69 years as the threshold for age) and 0.824 (5 points as the threshold for GCS), 0.612, 0.642 and 0.667, respectively. The AUC of the risk factors combined to predict pDoC was 0.938 (95%CI: 0.892-0.969, P<0.001).

Conclusion

Age (>69 years), GCS score (≤5 points), PTCI, PSH and chronic HCP are independent risk factors for pDoC. Those indexes could be jointly applied to improve the predictive value for pDoC.

Key words: Severe traumatic brain injury, Prolonged disorders of consciousness, Risk factors, Forecasting, Neurosurgical procedures
表1 2组患者的临床资料比较
Tab.1 Comparison of clinical data between two groups
项目 pDoC组（n=60） 非pDoC组（n=119） χ2/t值 P值
男性[例（%）] 43（71.7） 83（69.7） 0.791 0.070
年龄（岁，±s） 58.6±17.3 53.6±14.4 2.048 0.042
受伤原因[例（%）]     1.889 0.389
车祸 32（53.3） 51（42.9）    
跌伤 22（36.7） 51（42.9）    
其他 6（10.0） 17（14.3）    
高血压[例（%）] 12（20.0） 19（16.0） 0.501 0.453
糖尿病[例（%）] 6（10.0） 9（7.6） 0.309 0.579
脑疝[例（%）] 44（73.3） 43（36.1） 22.096 <0.001
颅底骨折[例（%）] 29（48.3） 45（37.8） 1.820 0.177
创伤性脑室出血[例（%）] 9（15.0） 6（5.0） 5.152 0.023
GCS评分（分，±s） 4.7±1.7 7.0±1.4 -8.818 <0.001
去骨瓣减压[例（%）] 50（83.3） 32（26.9） 51.189 <0.001
术后并发症[例（%）]        
PTCI 14（23.3） 1（0.8） 26.285 <0.001
创伤性硬膜下积液 16（26.7） 11（9.2） 9.453 0.002
应激性溃疡 41（68.3） 25（21.0） 38.380 <0.001
PSH 18（30.0） 2（1.7） 32.232 <0.001
慢性HCP 22（36.7） 4（3.4） 35.638 <0.001
表2 sTBI患者术后pDoC形成的多因素Logistic回归分析
Tab.2 Multivariate Logistic regression analysis of postoperative pDoC in sTBI patients
因素 回归系数 标准误 Wald's χ2值 OR值 95%CI P值
年龄 0.084 0.023 13.002 1.087 1.039~1.138 <0.001
脑疝 -0.311 0.727 0.183 0.733 0.176~3.045 0.669
创伤性脑室出血 0.163 0.854 0.036 1.177 0.221~6.274 0.849
GCS评分 -0.410 0.198 4.260 0.664 0.450~0.980 0.039
去骨瓣减压 -1.099 0.656 2.810 0.333 0.092~1.204 0.094
PTCI -3.025 1.267 5.705 0.049 0.004~0.581 0.017
应激性溃疡 -0.835 0.544 2.360 0.434 0.150~1.259 0.125
PSH -5.081 1.436 12.523 0.006 0.000~0.104 <0.001
慢性HCP -2.494 1.016 6.030 0.083 0.011~0.604 0.014
创伤性硬膜下积液 1.021 0.981 1.083 2.772 0.406~18.974 0.298
图1 不同危险因素预测pDoC的受试者工作特征曲线
Fig.1 Receiver operating characteristic curve of different risk factors predicting pDoC
表3 危险因素预测pDoC的曲线下面积
Tab.3 Area under the curve of pDoC predicted by risk factors
因素 曲线下面积 截断值 灵敏度（%） 特异度（%） 95%CI P值
年龄 0.597 69岁 35.00 85.71 0.521~0.669 0.041
GCS评分 0.824 5分 76.67 83.19 0.761~0.877 <0.001
PTCI 0.612 - 23.33 99.16 0.537~0.684 0.017
PSH 0.642 - 30.00 98.32 0.567~0.712 0.003
慢性HCP 0.667 - 36.67 96.64 0.592~0.735 <0.001
所有指标联合预测 0.938 - 75.00 90.76 0.892~0.969 <0.001
[1]
Gao G, Wu X, Feng J, et al. Clinical characteristics and outcomes in patients with traumatic brain injury in China: a prospective, multicentre, longitudinal, observational study[J]. Lancet Neurol, 2020, 19(8): 670-677. DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(20)30182-4.
[2]
杨艺,王凯,周锋,等.中国三个大城市意识障碍患者的治疗及陪护者现状的多中心调查[J].临床神经外科杂志, 2017, 14(2): 102-106, 111. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7770.2017.02.006.
[3]
中国医师协会神经修复专业委员会意识障碍与促醒学组.慢性意识障碍诊断与治疗中国专家共识[J].中华神经医学杂志, 2020, 19(10): 977-982. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn115354-20200701-00525.
[4]
Latronico N, Piva S, Fagoni N, et al. Impact of a posttraumatic cerebral infarction on outcome in patients with TBI: the Italian multicenter cohort INCEPT study[J]. Crit Care, 2020, 24(1): 33. DOI: 10.1186/s13054-020-2746-5.
[5]
Giacino JT, Katz DI, Schiff ND, et al. Practice guideline update recommendations summary: disorders of consciousness: report of the guideline development, dissemination, and implementation subcommittee of American Academy of Neurology; the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine; and the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research[J]. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 2018, 99(9): 1699-1709. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2018.07.001.
[6]
胡海成,王如海.高血压脑出血术后慢性脑积水的危险因素及预测指标分析[J].中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2019, 9(6): 350-354. DOI: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-123X.2019.06.007.
[7]
Podell JE, Miller SS, Jaffa MN, et al. Admission features associated with paroxysmal sympathetic hyperactivity after traumatic brain injury: a case-control study[J]. Crit Care Med, 2021, 49(10): e989-e1000. DOI: 10.1097/ccm.0000000000005076.
[8]
Blackman JA, Patrick PD, Buck ML, et al. Paroxysmal autonomic instability with dystonia after brain injury[J]. Arch Neurol, 2004, 61(3): 321-328. DOI: 10.1001/archneur.61.3.321.
[9]
杨艺,党圆圆,徐珑,等.弥漫性轴索损伤致慢性意识障碍患者意识恢复的影响因素分析[J].中华神经外科杂志, 2020, 36(10): 998-1003. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112050-20200330-00176.
[10]
Tian R, Liu W, Dong J, et al. Prognostic predictors of early outcomes and discharge status of patients undergoing decompressive craniectomy after severe traumatic brain injury[J]. World Neurosurg, 2019, 126: e101-e108. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.01.246.
[11]
Algethamy H. Baseline predictors of survival, neurological recovery, cognitive function, neuropsychiatric outcomes, and return to work in patients after a severe traumatic brain injury: an updated review[J]. Mater Sociomed, 2020, 32(2): 148-157. DOI: 10.5455/msm.2020.32.148-157.
[12]
Mollayeva T, Xiong C, Hanafy S, et al. Comorbidity and outcomes in traumatic brain injury: protocol for a systematic review on functional status and risk of death[J]. BMJ Open, 2017, 7(10): e018626. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018626.
[13]
Zhou JK, Zhang QS, Chen YQ, et al. Use of hematocrit for short-term prognosis of patients with traumatic brain injury after decompressive craniectomy[J]. World Neurosurg, 2019, 123: e141-e146. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2018.11.095.
[14]
Su TM, Lan CM, Lee TH, et al. Posttraumatic cerebral infarction after decompressive craniectomy for traumatic brain injury: incidence, risk factors and outcome[J]. Turk Neurosurg, 2017. Online ahead of print. DOI: 10.5137/1019-5149.Jtn.20761-17.1.
[15]
Chen ZL, Li Q, Yang JY, et al. The prevalence and risk factors of posttraumatic cerebral infarction in patients with traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Bioengineered, 2022, 13(5): 11706-11717. DOI: 10.1080/21655979.2022.2070999.
[16]
黄贤键,马宇强,高杰,等.创伤性大面积脑梗死的相关危险因素分析[J].中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2016, 2(3): 144-147. DOI: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-9141.2016.03.005.
[17]
Scott RA, Rabinstein AA. Paroxysmal sympathetic hyperactivity[J]. Semin Neurol, 2020, 40(5): 485-491. DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1713845.
[18]
Compton E. Paroxysmal sympathetic hyperactivity syndrome following traumatic brain injury[J]. Nurs Clin North Am, 2018, 53(3): 459-467. DOI: 10.1016/j.cnur.2018.05.003.
[19]
林清,谢秋幼,何艳斌,等.脑损伤后意识障碍患者意识恢复影响因素的Logistic回归分析[J].南方医科大学学报, 2017, 37(3): 337-341. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-4254.2017.03.10.
[20]
陈炎,林清,郭叶群,等.慢性意识障碍并发阵发性交感神经过度兴奋综合征的危险因素及其对预后的影响[J].临床神经病学杂志, 2019, 32(5): 359-363. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1648.2019.05.019.
[21]
杨艺,宋明,党圆圆,等.合并阵发性交感神经过度兴奋综合征的意识障碍患者脑部结构特征的研究[J].临床神经外科杂志, 2020, 17(1): 16-21. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7770.2020.01.005.
[22]
董月青,张赛,郎胜坤,等.慢性意识障碍合并脑积水的临床特征与疗效分析[J].临床神经外科杂志, 2020, 17(1): 27-32. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7770.2020.01.007.
[23]
Bodien YG, Barra A, Temkin NR, et al. Diagnosing level of consciousness: the limits of the Glasgow Coma Scale total score[J]. J Neurotrauma, 2021, 38(23): 3295-3305. DOI: 10.1089/neu.2021.0199.
[24]
Huang L, Kang J, Zhong Y, et al. A predictive model for awakening in patients with prolonged disorders of consciousness after craniocerebral injury[J]. Medicine (Baltimore), 2024, 103(2): e36701. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000036701.
[25]
Kang J, Zhong Y, Chen G, et al. Development and validation of a website to guide decision-making for disorders of consciousness[J]. Front Aging Neurosci, 2022, 14: 934283. DOI: 10.3389/fnagi.2022.934283.
[26]
Gritti P, Zangari R, Carobbio A, et al. Acute and subacute outcome predictors in moderate and severe traumatic brain injury: a retrospective monocentric study[J]. World Neurosurg, 2019, 128: e531-e540. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.04.190.
[1] 韩燕鸿, 潘建科, 罗明辉, 黄和涛, 曹厚然, 李想, 曾令烽, 梁桂洪, 陈红云, 刘军, 杨伟毅. 肩袖撕裂修复术后腱－骨愈合影响因素的研究进展[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 389-394.
[2] 丁关棣, 黄云, 曹震, 刘刚. 胃癌根治术后感染性并发症预测：基于真实世界数据的Nomogram模型开发与验证[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(03): 261-266.
[3] 张阳, 纽燕娜, 常丽蓉, 唐国华, 赵萍. ERAS理念下肝棘球蚴病术后并发症风险预测模型构建[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(03): 287-290.
[4] 高佳, 姜吉询, 王鑫, 吴婷, 向江明. 病理性乳头溢液单中心临床分析附168例报告[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(03): 323-326.
[5] 陈传勤, 张凯, 单世涵, 陶亮, 傅巧美. 腹壁巨大切口疝修补术后早期疼痛的危险因素分析[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 178-183.
[6] 周文欢, 杨黎. AECOPD低钠血症发生风险及预测因素分析[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(02): 313-315.
[7] 解良婕, 王剑, 阳韬. 采用AI的CT影像特征对肺结节良恶性鉴别的价值分析[J]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(02): 242-246.
[8] 钟知足, 陶波圆, 曾纪晓, 吴强, 王哲, 余家康, 刘斐, 徐晓钢, 兰梦龙, 梁子建, 李燕秋, 刘凤君. 儿童腹腔镜胆总管囊肿根治术后并发症危险因素分析[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(02): 83-89.
[9] 杨竞, 周光文. 肝硬化门静脉高压症治疗后再出血危险因素分析及预测模型构建[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(03): 296-301.
[10] 谭明达, 颜军, 郭诗翔. 保留十二指肠、胆总管、Oddi括约肌的胰头整块全切除术后并发症分析[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(02): 145-150.
[11] 赵倩, 刘文超, 李玺琳, 章邱东. 老年急性脑梗死诱发胃肠损伤的风险因素分析及模型构建[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(03): 213-217.
[12] 杨巨顺, 何伯圣. 急性肠系膜缺血不可逆肠坏死预测因素的研究进展[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(03): 275-281.
[13] 栗慧慧, 林香春. 早发结直肠癌的临床特征及危险因素分析[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 195-200.
[14] 邓仙裕, 罗钰璇, 张溱乐, 余展鹏, 彭亮. 自发性脑出血重症患者30 d死亡风险预测模型的建立及验证[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 121-128.
[15] 赖敏, 林碧玲, 王亚文, 林玉禧, 欧开雅. 中青年脑卒中患者重返工作的影响因素分析及预测模型构建[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 145-152.
阅读次数
全文


摘要

版权所有 中华医学会 中华医学电子音像出版社有限责任公司  京ICP备14006079号-1  网络出版服务许可证：(署)网出证(京)字第075号