Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a significant cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide and many patients with TBI require intensive care unit (ICU) management. When facing a life-threatening... Show moreTraumatic brain injury (TBI) is a significant cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide and many patients with TBI require intensive care unit (ICU) management. When facing a life-threatening illness, such as TBI, a palliative care approach that focuses on noncurative aspects of care should always be considered in the ICU. Research shows that neurosurgical patients in the ICU receive palliative care less frequently than the medical patients in the ICU, which is a missed opportunity for these patients. However, providing appropriate palliative care to neurotrauma patients in an ICU can be difficult, particularly for young adult patients. The patients' prognoses are often unclear, the likelihood of advance directives is small, and the bereaved families must act as decision-makers. This article highlights the different aspects of the palliative care approach as well as barriers and challenges that accompany the TBI patient population, with a particular focus on young adult patients with TBI and the role of their family members. The article concludes with recommendations for physicians for effective and adequate communication to successfully implement the palliative care approach into standard ICU care and to improve quality of care for patients with TBI and their families. Show less
Background: The rapidly increasing number of elderly (>= 65 years old) with TBI is accompanied by substantial medical and economic consequences. An ASDH is the most common injury in elderly with... Show moreBackground: The rapidly increasing number of elderly (>= 65 years old) with TBI is accompanied by substantial medical and economic consequences. An ASDH is the most common injury in elderly with TBI and the surgical versus conservative treatment of this patient group remains an important clinical dilemma. Current BTF guidelines are not based on high-quality evidence and compliance is low, allowing for large international treatment variation. The RESET-ASDH trial is an international multicenter RCT on the (cost-)effectiveness of early neurosurgical hematoma evacuation versus initial conservative treatment in elderly with a t-ASDHMethods: In total, 300 patients will be recruited from 17 Belgian and Dutch trauma centers. Patients >= 65 years with at first presentation a GCS >= 9 and a t-ASDH > 10 mm or a t-ASDH < 10 mm and a midline shift > 5 mm, or a GCS < 9 with a traumatic ASDH < 10 mm and a midline shift < 5 mm without extracranial explanation for the comatose state, for whom clinical equipoise exists will be randomized to early surgical hematoma evacuation or initial conservative management with the possibility of delayed secondary surgery. When possible, patients or their legal representatives will be asked for consent before inclusion. When obtaining patient or proxy consent is impossible within the therapeutic time window, patients are enrolled using the deferred consent procedure. Medical-ethical approval was obtained in the Netherlands and Belgium. The choice of neurosurgical techniques will be left to the discretion of the neurosurgeon. Patients will be analyzed according to an intention-to-treat design. The primary endpoint will be functional outcome on the GOS-E after 1 year. Patient recruitment starts in 2022 with the exact timing depending on the current COVID-19 crisis and is expected to end in 2024.Discussion: The study results will be implemented after publication and presented on international conferences. Depending on the trial results, the current Brain Trauma Foundation guidelines will either be substantiated by high-quality evidence or will have to be altered. Show less
Nederpelt, C.; Naar, L.; Meier, K.; Wijck, S. van; Krijnen, P.; Velmahos, G.; ... ; Schipper, I. 2022
Introduction Emergency physicians and trauma surgeons are increasingly confronted with pre-injury direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). The objective of this study was to assess if pre-injury DOACs,... Show moreIntroduction Emergency physicians and trauma surgeons are increasingly confronted with pre-injury direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). The objective of this study was to assess if pre-injury DOACs, compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKA), or no oral anticoagulants is independently associated with differences in treatment, mortality and inpatient rehabilitation requirement. Methods We performed a review of the prospectively maintained institutional trauma registry at an urban academic level 1 trauma center. We included all geriatric patients (aged >= 65 years) with tICH after a fall, admitted between January 2011 and December 2018. Multivariable logistic regression analysis controlling for demographics, comorbidities, vital signs, and tICH types were performed to identify the association between pre-injury anticoagulants and reversal agent use, neurosurgical interventions, inhospital mortality, 3-day mortality, and discharge to inpatient rehabilitation. Results A total of 1453 tICH patients were included (52 DOAC, 376 VKA, 1025 control). DOAC use was independently associated with lower odds of receiving specific reversal agents [odds ratio (OR) 0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15-0.54] than VKA patients. DOAC use was independently associated with requiring neurosurgical intervention (OR 3.14, 95% CI 1.36-7.28). VKA use, but not DOAC use, was independently associated with inhospital mortality, or discharge to hospice care (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.15-2.27) compared to controls. VKA use was independently associated with higher odds of discharge to inpatient rehabilitation (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.06-1.87) compared to controls. Conclusion Despite the higher neurosurgical intervention rates, patients with pre-injury DOAC use were associated with comparable rates of mortality and discharge to inpatient rehabilitation as patients without anticoagulation exposure. Future research should focus on risk assessment and stratification of DOAC-exposed trauma patients. Show less
BACKGROUND: The setting of a randomized trial can determine whether its findings are generalizable and can therefore apply to different settings. The contribution of low- and middle-income... Show moreBACKGROUND: The setting of a randomized trial can determine whether its findings are generalizable and can therefore apply to different settings. The contribution of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to neurosurgical randomized trials has not been systematically described before.OBJECTIVE: To perform a systematic analysis of design characteristics and methodology, funding source, and interventions studied between trials led by and/or conducted in high-income countries (HICs) vs LMICs.METHODS: From January 2003 to July 2016, English-language trials with >5 patients assessing any one neurosurgical procedure against another procedure, nonsurgical treatment, or no treatment were retrieved from MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library. Income classification for each country was assessed using the World Bank Atlas method.RESULTS: A total of 73.3% of the 397 studies that met inclusion criteria were led by HICs, whereas 26.7% were led by LMICs. Of the 106 LMIC-led studies, 71 were led by China. If China is excluded, only 8.8% were led by LMICs. HIC-led trials enrolled a median of 92 patients vs a median of 65 patients in LMIC-led trials. HIC-led trials enrolled from 7.6 sites vs 1.8 sites in LMIC-led studies. Over half of LMIC-led trials were institutionally funded (54.7%). The majority of both HIC- and LMIC-led trials evaluated spinal neurosurgery, 68% and 71.7%, respectively.CONCLUSION: We have established that there is a substantial disparity between HICs and LMICs in the number of published neurosurgical trials. A concerted effort to invest in research capacity building in LMICs is an essential step towards ensuring context- and resource-specific high-quality evidence is generated. Show less
