PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 15037369

Predicting outcome after multiple trauma: which scoring system?

M N Chawda·F Hildebrand·H C Pape·P V Giannoudis
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

We have undertaken a review of the commonly used scoring systems to identify advantages and possible pitfalls involved in their use. Currently, there is a variety of systems available for scoring trauma severity. Some of them are based on the anatomical description of the injuries, whilst others are based on physiological parameters. The most widely used systems for the purpose of predicting outcome after trauma are based on combined anatomical and physiological parameters. Systems such as the Injury Severity Score (ISS) and the Trauma Injury Severity Score (TRISS) have served some useful purposes and have proved popular over time, but it now seems that there is no ideal scoring system available. The task of incorporating various factors such as pre-existing morbidity, age, immunological differences and different genetic predispositions has made the prospect of creating a universally acceptable and applicable trauma-scoring system extremely arduous, if not impossible. Therefore caution should be exercised when using any of the existing scoring systems until an ideal one becomes available.

Explore related subjects

APACHEHumansInjury Severity ScoreMultiple TraumaPrognosisTrauma Severity IndicesJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M N Chawda, F Hildebrand, H C Pape, P V Giannoudis. 2004. Predicting outcome after multiple trauma: which scoring system?. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0020-1383(03)00140-2

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2005

Comparison of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome between monomicrobial and polymicrobial Pseudomonas aeruginosa nosocomial bloodstream infections.

BACKGROUND: Some studies of nosocomial bloodstream infection (nBSI) have demonstrated a higher mortality for polymicrobial bacteremia when compared to monomicrobial nBSI. The purpose of this study was to compare differences in systemic inflammatory response and mortality between monomicrobial and polymicrobial nBSI with Pseudomonas aeruginosa. METHODS: We performed a historical cohort study on 98 adults with P. aeruginosa (Pa) nBSI. SIRS scores were determined 2 days prior to the first positive blood culture through 14 days afterwards. Monomicrobial (n = 77) and polymicrobial BSIs (n = 21) were compared. RESULTS: 78.6% of BSIs were caused by monomicrobial P. aeruginosa infection (MPa) and 21.4% by polymicrobial P. aeruginosa infection (PPa). Median APACHE II score on the day of BSI was 22 for MPa and 23 for PPa BSIs. Septic shock occurred in 33.3% of PPa and in 39.0% of MPa (p = 0.64). Progression to septic shock was associated with death more frequently in PPa (OR 38.5, CI95 2.9-508.5) than MPa (OR 4.5, CI95 1.7-12.1). Maximal SIR (severe sepsis, septic shock or death) was seen on day 0 for PPa BSI vs. day 1 for MPa. No significant difference was noted in the incidence of organ failure, 7-day or overall mortality between the two groups. Univariate analysis revealed that APACHE II score > or = 20 at BSI onset, Charlson weighted comorbidity index > or = 3, burn injury and respiratory, cardiovascular, renal and hematologic failure were associated with death, while age, malignant disease, diabetes mellitus, hepatic failure, gastrointestinal complications, inappropriate antimicrobial therapy, infection with imipenem resistant P. aeruginosa and polymicrobial nBSI were not. Multivariate analysis revealed that hematologic failure (p < 0.001) and APACHE II score > or = 20 at BSI onset (p = 0.005) independently predicted death. CONCLUSION: In this historical cohort study of nBSI with P. aeruginosa, the incidence of septic shock and organ failure was high in both groups. Additionally, patients with PPa BSI were not more acutely ill, as judged by APACHE II score prior to blood culture positivity than those with MPa BSI. Using multivariable logistic regression analysis, the development of hematologic failure and APACHE II score > or = 20 at BSI onset were independent predictors of death; however, PPa BSI was not.

APACHE↗
PubMed2005

Glutamine-supplemented total parenteral nutrition attenuates plasma interleukin-6 in surgical patients with lower disease severity.

AIM: Previous reports have shown that decrease in plasma glutamine (Gln) level following major surgery may contribute to the state of immunosuppression. Gln supplementation improves the depletion of body Gln pool, and may have indirect effect on reducing proinflammatory mediator release. This study evaluated whether the effect of Gln dipeptide-enriched total parenteral nutrition (TPN) on postoperative cytokine alteration depended on the disease severity of surgical patients. METHODS: Forty-eight patients with major abdominal surgery were allocated to two groups to receive isonitrogenous (0.228 g nitrogen/kg per d) and isocaloric (30 kcal/kg per d) TPN for 6 d. Control group (Conv) using conventional TPN solution received 1.5 g amino acids/kg per day, whereas the test group received 0.972 g amino acids/kg per day and 0.417 g L-alanyl-L-glutamine (Ala-Gln)/kg per day. Blood samples were collected on d 1 and d 6 postoperatively for plasma interleukin (IL)-2, IL-6, IL-8, and interferon (IFN)-gamma analysis. RESULTS: Plasma IL-2 and IFN-gamma were not detectable. IL-6 concentrations were significantly lower on the 6(th) postoperative day in the Ala-Gln group than those in the Conv group in patients with APACHE II <=6, whereas no difference was noted in patients with APACHE II >6. There was no difference in IL-8 levels between the two groups. No difference in cumulative nitrogen balance was observed on d 2-5 after the operation between the two groups (Ala-Gln -3.2+/-1.6 g vs Conv -6.5+/-2.7 g). A significant inverse correlation was noted between plasma IL-6 levels and cumulative nitrogen balance postoperatively in the Ala-Gln group, whereas no such correlation was observed in the Conv group. CONCLUSION: TPN supplemented with Gln dipeptide had no effect on plasma IL-8 levels after surgery. However, Gln supplementation had a beneficial effect on decreasing systemic IL-6 production after surgery in patients with low admission illness severity, and lower plasma IL-6 may improve nitrogen balance in patients with abdominal surgery when Gln was administered.

APACHE↗
PubMed2005

Balthazar computed tomography severity index is superior to Ranson criteria and APACHE II scoring system in predicting acute pancreatitis outcome.

AIM: Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a process with variable involvement of regional tissues or organ systems. Multifactorial scales included the Ranson, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) systems and Balthazar computed tomography severity index (CTSI). The purpose of this review study was to assess the accuracy of CTSI, Ranson score, and APACHE II score in course and outcome prediction of AP. METHODS: We reviewed 121 patients who underwent helical CT within 48 h after onset of symptoms of a first episode of AP between 1999 and 2003. Fourteen inappropriate subjects were excluded; we reviewed the 107 contrast-enhanced CT images to calculate the CTSI. We also reviewed their Ranson and APACHE II score. In addition, complications, duration of hospitalization, mortality rate, and other pathology history also were our comparison parameters. RESULTS: We classified 85 patients (79%) as having mild AP (CTSI <5) and 22 patients (21%) as having severe AP (CTSI > or =5). In mild group, the mean APACHE II score and Ranson score was 8.6+/-1.9 and 2.4+/-1.2, and those of severe group was 10.2+/-2.1 and 3.1+/-0.8, respectively. The most common complication was pseudocyst and abscess and it presented in 21 (20%) patients and their CTSI was 5.9+/-1.4. A CTSI > or =5 significantly correlated with death, complication present, and prolonged length of stay. Patients with a CTSI > or =5 were 15 times to die than those CTSI <5, and the prolonged length of stay and complications present were 17 times and 8 times than that in CTSI <5, respectively. CONCLUSION: CTSI is a useful tool in assessing the severity and outcome of AP and the CTSI > or =5 is an index in our study. Although Ranson score and APACHE II score also are choices to be the predictors for complications, mortality and the length of stay of AP, the sensitivity of them are lower than CTSI.

APACHE↗