Search

Background: Cirrhosis in trauma patients is an indicator of poor prognosis, but current trauma injury grading systems do not take into account liver dysfunction as a risk factor. Our objective was to construct a simple clinical mortality prediction model in cirrhotic trauma patients: Cirrhosis Outcomes Score in Trauma (COST)., Methods: Trauma patients with pre-existing cirrhosis or liver dysfunction who were admitted to our ACS Level I trauma center between 2013 and 2021 were reviewed. Patients with significant acute liver trauma (AAST Grade ≥ 3) or those that developed acute liver dysfunction while admitted were excluded. Demographics as well as ISS, MELD, complications, and mortality were evaluated. COST was defined as the sum of age, ISS, and MELD. Univariate and multivariable analysis was used to determine independent predictors of mortality. The area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) was calculated to assess the ability of COST to predict mortality., Results: A total of 318 patients were analyzed of which the majority were males 214 (67.3%) who suffered blunt trauma 305 (95.9%). Mortality at 30-days, 60-days, and 90-days was 20.4%, 23.6%, and 25.5%, respectively. COST was associated with inpatient, 30-day, and 90-day mortality on regression analyses and the AUROC for COST predicting mortality at these respective time points was 0.810, 0.801, and 0.813., Conclusion: Current trauma injury grading systems do not take into account liver dysfunction as a risk factor. COST is highly predictive of mortality in cirrhotic trauma patients. The simplicity of the score makes it useful in guiding clinical care and in optimizing goals of care discussions. Future studies to validate this prediction model are required prior to clinical use., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors do not have any conflicts of interest to report., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: The purpose of this study was to analyze injury characteristics and stroke rates between blunt cerebrovascular injury (BCVI) with delayed vs non-delayed medical therapy. We hypothesized there would be increased stroke formation with delayed medical therapy., Methods: This is a sub-analysis of a 16 center, prospective, observational trial on BCVI. Delayed medial therapy was defined as initiation >24 hours after admission. BCVI which did not receive medical therapy were excluded. Subgroups for injury presence were created using Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) score >0 for AIS categories., Results: 636 BCVI were included. Median time to first medical therapy was 62 hours in the delayed group and 11 hours in the non-delayed group (p < 0.001). The injury severity score (ISS) was greater in the delayed group (24.0 vs the non-delayed group 22.0, p <  0.001) as was the median AIS head score (2.0 vs 1.0, p <  0.001). The overall stroke rate was not different between the delayed vs non-delayed groups respectively (9.7% vs 9.5%, p = 1.00). Further evaluation of carotid vs vertebral artery injury showed no difference in stroke rate, 13.6% and 13.2%, p = 1.00 vs 7.3% and 6.5%, p = 0.84. Additionally, within all AIS categories there was no difference in stroke rate between delayed and non-delayed medical therapy (all N.S.), with AIS head >0 13.8% vs 9.2%, p = 0.20 and AIS spine >0 11.0% vs 9.3%, p = 0.63 respectively., Conclusions: Modern BCVI therapy is administered early. BCVI with delayed therapy were more severely injured. However, a higher stroke rate was not seen with delayed therapy, even for BCVI with head or spine injuries. This data suggests with competing injuries or other clinical concerns there is not an increased stroke rate with necessary delays of medical treatment for BCVI., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest None., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)