Background and Purpose— Early prediction of clinical outcome after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) is still lacking accuracy. In this observational cohort study, we aimed to develop and validate an accurate bedside prediction model for clinical outcome after aSAH, to aid decision-making at an early stage. Methods— For the development of the prediction model, a prospectively kept single-center cohort of 1215 aSAH patients, admitted between 1998 and 2014, was used. For temporal validation, a prospective cohort of 224 consecutive aSAH patients from the same center, admitted between 2015 and 2017, was used. External validation was performed using the ISAT (International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial) database (2143 patients). Primary outcome measure was poor functional outcome 2 months after aSAH, defined as modified Rankin Scale score 4–6. The model was constructed using multivariate regression analyses. Performance of the model was examined in terms of discrimination and calibration. Results— The final model included 4 predictors independently associated with poor outcome after 2 months: age, World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies grade after resuscitation, aneurysm size, and Fisher grade. Temporal validation showed high discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.85–0.94), external validation showed fair to good discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.70–0.76). The model showed satisfactory calibration in both validation cohorts. The SAFIRE grading scale was derived from the final model: size of the aneurysm, age, Fisher grade, world federation of neurosurgical societies after resuscitation. Conclusions— The SAFIRE grading scale is an accurate, generalizable, and easily applicable model for early prediction of clinical outcome after aSAH.
for example, acute hydrocephalus requiring external cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drainage, can also interfere with early treatment. Traditionally, the critical time frame for ruptured Background and Purpose-Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) is a devastating type of stroke associated with high morbidity and mortality. One of the most feared complications is an early rebleeding before aneurysm repair. Predictors for such an often fatal rebleeding are largely unknown. We therefore aimed to determine predictors for an early rebleeding after aSAH in relation with time after ictus. Methods-This observational prospective cohort study included all consecutive patients admitted with aSAH between January 1998 and December 2014 (n=1337) at our University Neurovascular Center. Clinical predictors for rebleeding ≤24 hours were identified using multivariable Cox regression analyses. Kaplan-Meier analyses were applied to evaluate the time of rebleeding ≤72 hours after aSAH. Results-A modified Fisher grade of 3 to 4 was a predictor for an in-hospital rebleeding ≤24 hours after ictus (adjusted hazard ratio, 4.4; 95% confidence interval, 2.1-10.6; P<0.001). The numbers needed to treat to prevent 1 rebleeding ≤24 hours was calculated 15 (95% confidence interval, 10-25). Also, the initiation of external cerebrospinal fluiddrainage (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-2.5; P<0.001) was independently associated with a rebleeding ≤24 hours. Cumulative in-hospital rebleeding rates were 5.8% ≤24 hours, and 1.2% in the time frame 24-72 hours after ictus. Conclusions-In our opinion, timing of treatment of aSAH patients, especially those with an modified Fisher grade of 3 or 4 in a good clinical condition, should be reconsidered. These aSAH patients might be regarded a medical emergency, requiring aneurysm repair as soon as possible. In this respect, our findings should provoke the debate on timing of aneurysm repair, especially in patients considered to be at high risk for rebleeding. (Stroke. 2015;46:2100-2106.
OBJECTIVE Currently, early prediction of outcome after spontaneous subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) lacks accuracy despite multiple studies addressing this issue. The clinical condition of the patient on admission as assessed using the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies (WFNS) grading scale is currently considered the gold standard. However, the timing of the clinical assessment is subject to debate, as is the contribution of additional predictors. The aim of this study was to identify either the conventional WFNS grade on admission or the WFNS grade after neurological resuscitation (rWFNS) as the most accurate predictor of outcome after SAH. METHODS This prospective observational cohort study included 1620 consecutive patients with SAH admitted between January 1998 and December 2014 at our university neurovascular center. The primary outcome measure was a poor modified Rankin Scale score at the 2-month follow-up. Clinical predictors were identified using multivariate logistic regression analyses. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) analysis was used to test discriminative performance of the final model. An AUC of > 0.8 was regarded as indicative of a model with good prognostic value. RESULTS Poor outcome (modified Rankin Scale Score 4-6) was observed in 25% of the patients. The rWFNS grade was a significantly stronger predictor of outcome than the admission WFNS grade. The rWFNS grade was significantly associated with poor outcome (p < 0.001) as well as increasing age (p < 0.001), higher modified Fisher grade (p < 0.001), larger aneurysm size (p < 0.001), and the presence of an intracerebral hematoma (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.2-2.8; p = 0.002). The final model had an AUC of 0.87 (95% CI 0.85-0.89), which indicates excellent prognostic value regarding the discrimination between poor and good outcome after SAH. CONCLUSIONS In clinical practice and future research, neurological assessment and grading of patients should be performed using the rWFNS to obtain the best representation of their clinical condition.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.