Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 12 Documents
Search

A Comparative Analysis of Ipsilateral, Contralateral, and Bilateral Average ONSD in Correlating with Cerebral Midline Shift: Re-framing a Non-Invasive Tool from a Quantitative Predictor to a Clinical Classifier Ramadina Putri Cahyanti Ghofar; Buyung Hartiyo Laksono; Taufiq Agus Siswagama
Archives of The Medicine and Case Reports Vol. 6 No. 4 (2025): Archives of The Medicine and Case Reports
Publisher : HM Publisher

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.37275/amcr.v6i4.823

Abstract

In traumatic brain injury (TBI), non-invasive proxies for mass effect are crucial. The optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD) is used to estimate intracranial pressure (ICP), but its correlation with structural outcomes like midline shift (MLS) is poorly defined, particularly regarding the optimal measurement method (unilateral vs. bilateral). We prospectively enrolled 38 adult TBI patients who received both a CT scan and a bedside ONSD ultrasound within 24 hours. Data was re-analyzed to classify ONSD relative to lesion location (Ipsilateral, Contralateral) and to correlate these, plus the Bilateral Average (ONSD-Avg), with CT-measured MLS using Spearman's correlation. We used linear regression to assess quantitative prediction (R-square) and binary logistic regression (ROC curve) to assess clinical classification (AUC) for predicting MLS >5mm. A significant, positive correlation was found between MLS and Ipsilateral-ONSD (rs = 0.450, p = 0.005) and ONSD-Avg (rs = 0.383, p = 0.018). The Contralateral-ONSD correlation was not significant (rs = 0.210, p = 0.206). A Wilcoxon test confirmed Ipsilateral-ONSD was significantly wider than Contralateral-ONSD (p < 0.01). The linear regression model for MLS quantification was statistically significant (p = 0.015) but had a very low predictive power (R-square = 0.153). In contrast, the logistic regression model found ONSD-Avg to be an excellent classifier for detecting surgical MLS (> 5mm), with an Area Under the Curve (AUC) of 0.88 (95% CI 0.75-0.96). In conclusion, ONSD measurement is significantly affected by asymmetric, unilateral TBI pathology. The bilateral average (ONSD-Avg) is the most reliable screening method, as it compensates for unilateral pressure gradients. The low R-square (15.3%) confirms ONSD is a poor quantitative predictor of MLS, reflecting the non-linear pressure-volume relationship. However, the high AUC (0.88) proves ONSD is an excellent clinical classifier for identifying patients with surgical-threshold mass effect. ONSD should not be used to "quantify" MLS, but rather to "classify" patient risk.
Admission GCS, Age, and Pupillary Response as a Multivariable Triad for Predicting Outcomes Following Emergent Surgery for Traumatic Brain Injury Ramadhan Saputro; Aswoco Andyk Asmoro; Buyung Hartiyo Laksono
Journal of Anesthesiology and Clinical Research Vol. 7 No. 1 (2025): Journal of Anesthesiology and Clinical Research
Publisher : HM Publisher

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.37275/jacr.v7i1.822

Abstract

Introduction: Early prognostication for patients with moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) requiring emergent surgery and intensive care is critical but complex. While the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) is foundational, its standalone predictive power, especially when unadjusted for known confounders, can be misleading. This study aimed to determine the independent predictive value of admission GCS within a multivariable model including other key clinical predictors. Methods: We conducted a retrospective, descriptive-analytic study at a tertiary referral center in Indonesia, analyzing a specific cohort of 150 patients with moderate-to-severe TBI (GCS 3–12) who all underwent the emergent ED-OR-ICU pathway between July and December 2024. Data on admission GCS, patient age, pupillary reactivity, and CT findings (Marshall score) were extracted. We built multivariable logistic regression models to predict two primary outcomes: (1) In-Hospital Mortality and (2) Unfavorable Functional Outcome (a composite of mortality or discharge to a skilled nursing/palliative care facility). Results: A univariate analysis identifying a GCS cut-off of 9.5 produced a statistically unstable odds ratio (OR) for mortality of 104.87, consistent with quasi-complete separation. However, in the multivariable model, this effect was resolved. After adjusting for confounders, GCS remained a significant independent predictor of mortality (Adjusted OR 2.78 per point decrease) and unfavorable outcome (aOR 3.11 per point decrease). Crucially, non-reactive pupils (aOR 5.12 for mortality) and patient age (aOR 1.07 per year for unfavorable outcome) were found to be equally, if not more, powerful independent predictors. Conclusion: Admission GCS is a robust and independent predictor of outcome in high-risk surgical TBI patients, but its true value is only revealed when used as part of a multivariable assessment. The statistical power of univariate GCS is easily inflated by confounding. We conclude that prognostication in this cohort must be a multivariable exercise, incorporating GCS, pupillary response, and age as an essential prognostic triad.