metricas

Acta Colombiana de Cuidado Intensivo

Sugerencias
Acta Colombiana de Cuidado Intensivo Traumatismo encefalocraneano moderado y grave en la Unidad de Cuidados Intensivo...
Información de la revista
Vol. 25. Núm. 4.
Páginas 579-746 (Octubre - Diciembre 2025)
Cita
Cita
Compartir
Descargar PDF
Más opciones de artículo
Visitas
1729
Vol. 25. Núm. 4.
Páginas 579-746 (Octubre - Diciembre 2025)
ORIGINAL

Traumatismo encefalocraneano moderado y grave en la Unidad de Cuidados Intensivos: trayectoria y factores pronósticos

Moderate and severe traumatic brain injury in the intensive care unit: Trajectory and prognostic factors
Visitas
1729
Pedro Grillea,
Autor para correspondencia
grillepm@gmail.com

Autor para correspondencia.
, Antonella Di Maggioa, Hugo Peluffob,c,d, Andrés Cawenb,c, Daniela Alíd, Ingrid Kaseke, Matías Negrottof
a Unidad de Cuidados Intensivos, Hospital Maciel, ASSE, Montevideo, Uruguay
b Unitat de Bioquímica i Biologia Molecular, Departament de Biomedicina, Facultat de 2 Medicina i Ciències de la Salut, Universitat de Barcelona (UB), Barcelona, España
c Institut de Neurociències, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, España
d Unidad de Bioimagenología Avanzada, Institut Pasteur de Montevideo, Montevideo, Uruguay
e Departamento de Rehabilitación, Hospital del Banco de Seguros del Estado (BSE), Montevideo, Uruguay
f Servicio de Imagenología, Hospital Maciel, ASSE, Montevideo, Uruguay
Este artículo ha recibido
Información del artículo
Resumen
Texto completo
Bibliografía
Descargar PDF
Estadísticas
Resumen
Introducción

El trauma encefalocraneano (TEC) es una entidad heterogénea. Se necesita una mejor caracterización evolutiva de estos pacientes para realizar un tratamiento individualizado.

Objetivo

Identificar variables clínicas y paraclínicas que describan la trayectoria y pronóstico de pacientes con TEC moderado y grave (TECmg).

Métodos

Estudio prospectivo de todos los pacientes ingresados con TECmg a Unidad de Cuidados Intensivos. Se realizó seguimiento neurológico a 12 meses mediante GOSE y DRS. Se identificaron características clínicas, imagenológicas y de neuromonitorización invasiva y no invasiva. Se dosificaron en sangre 4 biomarcadores cerebrales: NFL, UCH-L1, GFAP y Tau.

Resultados

Se estudió a 75 pacientes (81% graves y 19% moderados). La mortalidad a 12 meses fue del 24,6 y el 10% (TEC grave y moderado respectivamente). Se evidenció una mejoría funcional y cognitiva de los pacientes durante su rehabilitación: GOSE 5-8 en el 73,4% y DRS: 0-11 en 53%. La presencia de shock y herniación encefálica se asociaron estadísticamente con peor pronóstico. Una morfología de hendidura tentorial pequeña se asoció significativamente con neurodeterioro crítico. Los niveles iniciales de GFAP, UCH-L1 y NFL fueron significativamente más elevados en pacientes con TECmg que en controles sanos y con traumatismo sin TEC. Los niveles de UCH-L1 al ingreso se asociaron en forma estadísticamente significativa con el pronóstico neurológico. NFL se correlacionó con patrón de lesión axonal difusa.

Conclusiones

Primer estudio en nuestro medio de comparación del pronóstico neurológico funcional a largo plazo y biomarcadores cerebrales en pacientes adultos con TECmg. Dichos biomarcadores pueden contribuir a la descripción de trayectorias de estos pacientes.

Palabras clave:
Traumatismo craneoencefálico
Pronóstico
Biomarcadores
Tienda del cerebelo
Abstract
Introduction

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a heterogeneous entity. Better characterization of trajectories is needed to provide individualized treatment.

Objectives

Identify clinical and paraclinical variables that might describe trajectory and long-term neurological prognosis of patients with moderate and severe TBI (msTBI).

Methods

Prospective study of all patients admitted with msTBI to the intensive care unit. Neurological follow-up was performed at 12 months using the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE) and the Disability Rating Scale (DRS). Clinical characteristics upon admission, physiological parameters, imaging, invasive and non-invasive neuromonitoring information, as well as blood determination of 4 brain biomarkers were identified: NFL, UCH-L1, GFAP and Tau.

Results

Seventy-five patients were studied (81% severe and 19% moderate). A functional and cognitive improvement was evident during rehabilitation, with good evolution (GOSE: 5-8) in 73.4% and partial or no disability (DRS: 0-11) in 53% of the patients. The presence of shock and brain herniation were statistically associated with a worse prognosis. The finding of a small tentorial notch morphology was significantly associated with the development of neuroworsening. Baseline levels of GFAP, UCH-L1 and NFL were significantly higher in patients with msTBI compared to healthy and traumatized controls without TBI. UCH-L1 levels at admission were statistically significantly associated with outcome. Patients with predominant diffuse axonal injury presented higher NFL values in relation to other injury patterns.

Conclusions

The first study in our environment comparing functional neurological prognosis and brain biomarkers in patients with msTBI is presented. These biomarkers could contribute to describe their trajectories.

Keywords:
Traumatic brain injury
Outcomes
Blood biomarkers
Tentorium cerebelli

Artículo

Opciones para acceder a los textos completos de la publicación Acta Colombiana de Cuidado Intensivo
Suscriptor
Suscriptor de la revista

Si ya tiene sus datos de acceso, clique aquí.

Si olvidó su clave de acceso puede recuperarla clicando aquí y seleccionando la opción "He olvidado mi contraseña".
Comprar
Comprar acceso al artículo

Comprando el artículo el PDF del mismo podrá ser descargado

Comprar ahora
Contactar
Teléfono para suscripciones e incidencias
De lunes a viernes de 9h a 18h (GMT+1) excepto los meses de julio y agosto que será de 9 a 15h
Llamadas desde España
932 415 960
Llamadas desde fuera de España
+34 932 415 960
E-mail
Bibliografía
[1]
A. Brazinova, V. Rehorcikova, M.S. Taylor, V. Buckova, M. Majdan, M. Psota, et al.
Epidemiology of traumatic brain injury in europe: A living systematic review.
J Neurotrauma., 38 (2021), pp. 1411-1440
[2]
R.H. Bonow, J. Barber, N.R. Temkin, W. Videtta, C. Rondina, G. Petroni, et al.
The outcome of severe traumatic brain injury in Latin America.
World Neurosurg., 111 (2018), pp. e82-e90
[3]
A.I.R. Maas, D.K. Menon, G.T. Manley, M. Abrams, C. Akerlund, N. Andelic, InTBIR Participants and Investigators, et al.
Traumatic brain injury: Progress and challenges in prevention, clinical care, and research.
Lancet Neurol., 21 (2022), pp. 1004-1060
[4]
D.V. De Oliveira, R.C.A. Vieira, L.Z. Pipek, R.M.C. de Sousa, C.P.E. de Souza, E. Santana-Santos, et al.
Long-term outcomes in severe traumatic brain injury and associated factors: A prospective cohort study.
J Clin Med., 11 (2022), pp. 6466
[5]
T. Svedung Wettervik, A. Hånell, P. Enblad, A. Lewén.
Intracranial lesion features in moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury: Relation to neurointensive care variables and clinical outcome.
Acta Neurochir (Wien)., 165 (2023), pp. 2389-2398
[6]
S. Bhattacharyay, P.F. Caruso, C. Åkerlund, L. Wilson, R.D. Stevens, D.K. Menon, CENTER-TBI investigators and participants, et al.
Mining the contribution of intensive care clinical course to outcome after traumatic brain injury.
NPJ Digit Med., 6 (2023), pp. 154
[7]
B.L. Brett, N. Temkin, J.K. Barber, D.O. Okonkwo, M. Stein, for TRACK-TBI Investigators, et al.
Long-term multidomain patterns of change after traumatic brain injury: A TRACK-TBI LONG Study.
Neurology., 101 (2023), pp. e740-e753
[8]
G.W.J. Hawryluk, S. Aguilera, A. Buki, E. Bulger, G. Citerio, D.J. Cooper, et al.
A management algorithm for patients with intracranial pressure monitoring: The Seattle International Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Consensus Conference (SIBICC).
Intensive Care Med., 45 (2019), pp. 1783-1794
[9]
K. Martínez-Palacios, S. Vásquez-García, O.A. Fariyike, C. Robba, A.M. Rubiano, Noninvasive intracranial pressure monitoring international consensus group.
Quantitative pupillometry for intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring in traumatic brain injury: A scoping review.
Neurocrit Care., 41 (2024), pp. 255-271
[10]
D.E. Adler, T.H. Milhorat.
The tentorial notch: anatomical variation, morphometric analysis, and classification in 100 human autopsy cases.
J Neurosurg., 96 (2002), pp. 1103-1112
[11]
P. Grille, A. Biestro, O. Telis, F. Verga, N. Sgarbi.
Individual variation of tentorial notch morphometry in a series of neurocritical patients.
Arq Neuropsiquiatr., 79 (2021), pp. 781-788
[12]
J.T.L. Wilson, L.E.L. Pettigrew, G.M. Teasdale.
Structured interviews for the Glasgow Outcome Scale and Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale: Guidelines for their use.
J Neurotrauma., 15 (1998), pp. 573-585
[13]
D. Krch, A.H. Lequerica.
The factor structure of the Disability Rating Scale in individuals with traumatic brain injury.
Disabil Rehabil., 41 (2019), pp. 98-103
[14]
A. Salim, D.M. Stein, B.L. Zarzaur, D.H. Livingston.
Measuring long-term outcomes after injury: Current issues and future directions.
Trauma Surg Acute Care Open., 8 (2023), pp. e001068
[15]
T.D. Azad, P.P. Shah, H.B. Kim, R.D. Stevens.
Endotypes and the path to precision in moderate and severe traumatic brain injury.
Neurocrit Care., 37 (2022), pp. 259-266.67
[16]
E.W. Steyerberg, N. Mushkudiani, P. Perel, I. Butcher, J. Lu, G.S. McHugh, et al.
Predicting outcome after traumatic brain injury: Development and international validation of prognostic scores based on admission characteristics.
[17]
M.A. McCrea, J.T. Giacino, J. Barber, J.T. Giacino, J. Barber, N.R. Temkin, et al.
Functional outcomes over the first year after moderate to severe traumatic brain injury in the prospective, longitudinal TRACK-TBI Study.
JAMA Neurol., 78 (2021), pp. 982-992
[18]
S. Kanny, J.T. Giacino.
Natural history of recovery and long-term outcome in critically ill patients with brain injury.
Curr Opin Crit Care., 31 (2025), pp. 162-169
[19]
C. Robba, F. Graziano, E. Picetti, C. Åkerlund, A. Addis, G. Pastore, CENTER-TBI Participants and Investigators, et al.
Early systemic insults following traumatic brain injury: Association with biomarker profiles, therapy for intracranial hypertension, and neurological outcomes-an analysis of CENTER-TBI data.
Intensive Care Med., 50 (2024), pp. 371-384
[20]
C.A. Åkerlund, J. Donnelly, F.A. Zeiler, R. Helbok, A. Holst, M. Cabeleira, CENTER-TBI High Resolution ICU Sub-Study Participants and Investigators, et al.
Impact of duration and magnitude of raised intracranial pressure on outcome after severe traumatic brain injury: A CENTER-TBI high-resolution group study.
PLoS One., 15 (2020), pp. e0243427
[21]
C. Sokoloff, D. Williamson, K. Serri, M. Albert, C. Odier, E. Charbonney, ÉRESI Reseach Group, et al.
Clinical usefulness of transcranial doppler as a screening tool for early cerebral hypoxic episodes in patients with moderate and severe traumatic brain injury.
Neurocrit Care., 32 (2020), pp. 486-491
[22]
B. Riveros Gilardi, J.I. Muñoz López, A.C. Hernández Villegas, J.A. Garay Mora, O.C. Rico Rodrríguez.
Types of cerebral herniation and their imaging features.
Radiographics., 39 (2019), pp. 1598-1610
[23]
L. Wilson, V.F.J. Newcombe, D.P. Whitehouse, S. Mondello, A.I.R. Maas, D.K. Menon, CENTER-TBI participants and investigators.
Association of early blood-based biomarkers and six-month functional outcomes in conventional severity categories of traumatic brain injury: Capturing the continuous spectrum of injury.
EBioMedicine., 107 (2024), pp. 105298
[24]
I.R.A. Retel Helmrich, E. Czeiter, K. Amrein, A. Buki, H.F. Lingsma, D.K. Menon, et al.
Incremental prognostic value of acute serum biomarkers for functional outcome after traumatic brain injury (CENTER-TBI): An observational cohort study.
Lancet Neurol., 21 (2022), pp. 792-802
[25]
C.A.I. Åkerlund, A. Holst, S. Bhattacharyay, N. Stoccheti, E. Steyerberg, P. Smielewski, et al.
Clinical descriptors of disease trajectories in patients with traumatic brain injury in the intensive care unit (CENTER-TBI): A multicentre observational cohort study.
Lancet Neurol., 23 (2024), pp. 71-80
[26]
R.J. Samanta, A.C. Chiollaz, E. Needham, J.K. Yue, A. Helmy, E.R. Zanier, TRACK-TBI investigators and participants; CENTER-TBI investigators and participants, et al.
Parsimonious immune-response endotypes and global outcome in patients with traumatic brain injury.
EBioMedicine., 108 (2024), pp. 105310
[27]
D.P. Whitehouse, A.R. Vile, K. Adatia, R. Herlekar, A.S. Roy, S. Mondello, et al.
Blood biomarkers and structural imaging correlations post-traumatic brain injury: A systematic review.
Neurosurgery., 90 (2022), pp. 170-179
[28]
S. Richter, E. Czeiter, K. Amrein, A. Mikolic, J. Verheyden, K. Wang, et al.
Prognostic value of serum biomarkers in patients with moderate-severe traumatic brain injury, differentiated by marshall computer tomography classification.
J Neurotrauma., 40 (2023), pp. 2297-2310
[29]
D.O. Okonkwo, R.C. Puffer, A.M. Puccio, E.L. Yuh, J.K. Yue, R. Díaz-Arrastia, Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury (TRACK-TBI) Investigators, et al.
Point-of-care platform blood biomarker testing of glial fibrillary acidic protein versus S100 calcium-binding protein B for prediction of traumatic brain injuries: A transforming research and clinical knowledge in traumatic brain injury study.
J Neurotrauma., 37 (2020), pp. 2460-2467
[30]
E. Thelin, F. Al Nimer, A. Frostell, H. Zetterberg, K. Blennow, H. Nyström, et al.
A serum protein biomarker panel improves outcome prediction in human traumatic brain injury.
J Neurotrauma., 36 (2019), pp. 2850-2862
[31]
E. Trifilio, S. Bottari, L.E. McQuillan, D.J. Barton, D.G. Lamb, C. Robertson, et al.
Temporal profile of serum neurofilament light (NF-L) and heavy (pNF-H) level associations with 6-month cognitive performance in patients with moderate-severe traumatic brain injury.
J Head Trauma Rehabil., 39 (2024), pp. E470-E480
[32]
I. Hossain, N. Marklund, E. Czeiter, P. Hutchinson, A. Buki.
Blood biomarkers for traumatic brain injury: A narrative review of current evidence.
Brain Spine., 4 (2023), pp. 102735
asdasdasd
Opciones de artículo
Herramientas