TBI risk stratification at presentation

Department of Surgery, University of Texas-Southwestern Medical Center, Parkland Memorial Hospital, Dallas, Texas 75390-9158, USA.
The journal of trauma and acute care surgery 08/2012; 73(2 Suppl 1):S122-7. DOI: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3182606327
Source: PubMed


We have created a theoretical algorithm for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after traumatic brain injury (TBI) known as the Parkland Protocol, which stratifies patients into low-, medium-, and high-risk categories for spontaneous progression of hemorrhage. This prospective study characterizes the incidence and timing of radiographic progression of the TBI patterns in these categories.
Inclusion criterion was presentation with intracranial blood between February 2010 and March 2011; exclusion was receipt of only one computed tomographic scan of the head during the inpatient stay or preinjury warfarin. At admission, all patients were preliminarily categorized per the Parkland Protocol as follows: low risk (LR), patients meeting the modified Berne-Norwood criteria; moderate risk (MR), injuries larger than the modified Berne-Norwood criteria without requiring a neurosurgical procedure; high risk (HR), any patient with a craniotomy/monitor.
A total of 245 patients with intracranial hemorrhage were enrolled during the 13-month study period. Of patients preliminarily classified as LR at admission (n = 136), progression was seen in 25.0%. Spontaneous worsening was seen in 7.4% of LR patients at 24 hours after injury, and no LR patients progressed at 72 hours after injury. In patients initially classified as MR at admission (n = 42), progression was seen in 42.9%, with 91.5% of patients demonstrating stable computed tomographic head scans at 72 hours after injury. In patients initially classified as HR (n = 67), 64.2% demonstrated spontaneous progression of their TBI patterns, with 10.5% continuing to progress at 72 hours after injury. Most repeat scans were performed as routinely scheduled studies (81-91%).
Increases in the incidence of spontaneous worsening were seen as severities of injury progressed from the Parkland Protocol's LR to MR to HR arms. The time frames for these spontaneous worsenings seem to be such that the protocol's theoretical recommendations for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis are worth pursuing as future points of investigation.

Download full-text


Available from: Herb Phelan
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite the frequency and morbidity of venous thromboembolism (VTE) development after traumatic brain injury (TBI), no national standard of care exists to guide TBI caregivers for the use of prophylactic anticoagulation. Fears of iatrogenic propagation of intracranial hemorrhage patterns have led to a dearth of research in this field, and it is only relatively recently that studies dedicated to this question have been performed. These have generally been limited to retrospective and/or observational studies in which patients are classified in a binary fashion as having the presence or absence of intracranial blood. This methodology does not account for the fact that smaller injury patterns stabilize more rapidly, and thus may be able to safely tolerate earlier initiation of prophylactic anticoagulation than larger injury patterns. This review seeks to critically assess the literature on this question by examining the existing evidence on the safety and efficacy of pharmacologic VTE prophylaxis in the setting of elective craniotomy (as this is the closest model available from which to extrapolate) and after TBI. In doing so, we critique studies that approach TBI as a homogenous or a heterogenous study population. Finally, we propose our own theoretical protocol which stratifies patients into low, moderate, and high risk for the likelihood of natural progression of their hemorrhage pattern, and which allows one to tailor a unique VTE prophylaxis regimen to each individual arm.
    Full-text · Article · May 2012 · Journal of neurotrauma
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Our group has created an algorithm for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after traumatic brain injury (TBI), which stratifies patients into low, moderate, and high risk for spontaneous injury progression and tailors a prophylaxis regimen to each arm. We present the results of the Delayed Versus Early Enoxaparin Prophylaxis I study, a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized pilot trial on the low-risk arm. METHODS: In this two-institution study, patients presenting within 6 hours of injury with prespecified small TBI patterns and stable scans at 24 hours after injury were randomized to receive enoxaparin 30 mg bid or placebo from 24 to 96 hours after injury in a double-blind fashion. An additional computed tomography scan was obtained on all subjects 24 hours after starting treatment (and therefore 48 hours after injury). The primary end point was the radiographic worsening of TBI; secondary end points were venous thromboembolism occurrence and extracranial hemorrhagic complications. RESULTS: A total of 683 consecutive patients with TBI were screened during the 28 center months. The most common exclusions were for injuries larger than the prespecified criteria (n = 199) and preinjury anticoagulant use (n = 138). Sixty-two patients were randomized to enoxaparin (n = 34) or placebo (n = 28). Subclinical, radiographic TBI progression rates on the scans performed 48 hours after injury and 24 hours after start of treatment were 5.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.7-19.7%) for enoxaparin and 3.6% (95% CI, 0.1-18.3%) for placebo, a treatment effect difference of 2.3% (95% CI, -14.42-16.5%). No clinical TBI progressions occurred. One deep vein thrombosis occurred in the placebo arm. CONCLUSION: TBI progression rates after starting enoxaparin in small, stable injuries 24 hours after injury are similar to those of placebo and are subclinical. The next Delayed Versus Early Enoxaparin Prophylaxis studies will assess efficacy of this practice in a powered study on the low-risk arm and a pilot trial of safety of a 72-hour time point in the moderate-risk arm. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, level II.
    Full-text · Article · Aug 2012
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: No standard exists for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis after traumatic brain injury (TBI). Caregivers agree that there is an early time point after injury in which the chances of spontaneous injury progression are high and the risks of prophylactic anticoagulation are excessive, and that these injuries eventually stabilize to the point that anticoagulation may be safely started. Translating this consensus into an application that can inform bedside decision making has not occurred. National groups have promulgated guidelines in the United States suggesting that anticoagulants be used when the risk of renewed intracranial hemorrhage has ceased with no guidance beyond this vague recommendation. This is largely due to the relative paucity of literature about pharmacologic prophylaxis, which has in turn been due to fears of propagation of intracranial hemorrhage. Although interest in this field has increased of late, many studies are limited by the simple dichotomization of TBI patients as having the presence or absence of intracranial blood. Although methodologically easier, this approach does not account for the heterogeneity of TBI and, consequently, the spectrum of time to stabilization. To address this, our group has created an algorithm which stratifies patients by risk for spontaneous progression and tailors a unique VTE prophylaxis regimen to each arm.
    Full-text · Article · Apr 2013 · Seminars in Thrombosis and Hemostasis
Show more