Traumatic Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: Demographic and Clinical Study of 750 Patients from the European Brain Injury Consortium Survey of Head Injuries

Dynamics of brain tissue changes induced by traumatic brain injury assessed with the Marshall, Morris–Marshall, and the Rotterdam classifications and its impact on outcome in a prostacyclin placebo-controlled study

“…This could perhaps be explained by redistribution of the subarachnoid blood or as a new bleeding. It is well recognized that the outcome after sTBI is worse if a tSAH is present [9,11,17,24,38], therefore, we applied the Morris-Marshall scale, which is especially designed for grading of tSAH [26]. As expected, we found a correlation between the Morris-Marshall grade and the GOS score for both CT i and CT 24 .…”

Prognostic value of various intracranial pathologies in traumatic brain injury

“…The results of our study with regards to haemorrhage and SAH are different to many other studies [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]. We initially hypothesised that the different case mix of our data can explain this.…”

“…There are several traditional terms such as intracranial haemorrhage, subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH), epidural haemorrhage (EDH), subdural haemorrhage (SDH) or brain swelling to describe the structural brain damage. The association of these pathologies such as intracranial haemorrhage [1], SAH [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10], SDH [7,11,12], EDH [2,[5][6][7]11] and brain swelling [3,11,13] with outcome has been shown in the TBI literature.…”

“…This is presented as 140652. 4 Furthermore, the Marshall Classification of CT findings in TBI was first introduced in 1991 and is used to have a more accurate predictive assessment of TBI patients who sustained intracranial hypertension by considering those injuries which are causes of or somehow related to raised intracranial pressure [16]. Since this classification is based on the degree of brain swelling or the extent of mass lesion, it disregards physiological characteristics and the anatomical distribution of injuries in that, for example, contusion, SDH or EDH are all considered as mass lesions.…”

“…The TARN data offer the opportunity to assess the predictive performance of various intracranial pathologies in TBI. The studies on this issue so far have been conducted on older datasets, which may not take account of temporal advances and improvements in trauma care systems [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13]. The objective of this study is twofold: first, to determine the relative prognostic strength of various AIS severity scores of brain injury, the Marshall Classification and various intracranial pathologies, and, second, to determine which intracranial pathologies are more important for outcome prediction in TBI using a more recent dataset.…”