Background: The Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) method is a widely used tool for assessing patient severity and predicting survival probability in trauma care. However, its accuracy and applicability in the Korean context, particularly for neurotrauma patients, have not been thoroughly validated yet. Previous studies at a single institution have identified significant discrepancies between TRISS predictions and actual outcomes, particularly in severe neurotrauma cases. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of the TRISS method on a national scale using data from multiple regional trauma centers (RTCs) in Korea. Methods: We utilized data from the Korea Trauma Data Bank collected from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2021. A total of 70,785 patients were selected based on specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. The probability of survival was calculated using the TRISS method.Patients were categorized into neurotrauma and non-neurotrauma groups. Misclassification rate (MR) was measured by comparing the predicted survival or death using the TRISS method with the actual outcomes to assess the predictive validity of the TRISS method. Results: This study included 28,285 neurotrauma patients and 42,503 non-neurotrauma patients. The neurotrauma group had higher actual deaths (2,401) than the non-neurotrauma group (809). The neurotrauma group also had a significantly higher mortality rate per 100,000 population (8,489.50 vs. 1,903.40). MR was significantly higher in neurotrauma patients (8.07%) than in non-neurotrauma patients (1.92%). Patients with severe head injuries (Glasgow Coma Scale ≤ 8) had the highest MR (32.27%). Conclusion Our study confirms that the TRISS method's misclassification issues observed at a single institution are prevalent across multiple RTCs in Korea. The accuracy of the TRISS method decreases with increasing injury severity, particularly in neurotrauma patients. These findings highlight the need to revise evaluation criteria and develop more accurate prediction models tailored to the Korean trauma care system. Implementing these changes will enhance the reliability of trauma care assessments and ensure more equitable support for RTCs, ultimately improving the quality and equity of trauma care in Korea.

Background: The Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) method is a widely used tool for assessing patient severity and predicting survival probability in trauma care. However, its accuracy and applicability in the Korean context, particularly for neurotrauma patients, have not been thoroughly validated yet. Previous studies at a single institution have identified significant discrepancies between TRISS predictions and actual outcomes, particularly in severe neurotrauma cases. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of the TRISS method on a national scale using data from multiple regional trauma centers (RTCs) in Korea. Methods: We utilized data from the Korea Trauma Data Bank collected from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2021. A total of 70,785 patients were selected based on specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. The probability of survival was calculated using the TRISS method.Patients were categorized into neurotrauma and non-neurotrauma groups. Misclassification rate (MR) was measured by comparing the predicted survival or death using the TRISS method with the actual outcomes to assess the predictive validity of the TRISS method. Results: This study included 28,285 neurotrauma patients and 42,503 non-neurotrauma patients. The neurotrauma group had higher actual deaths (2,401) than the non-neurotrauma group (809). The neurotrauma group also had a significantly higher mortality rate per 100,000 population (8,489.50 vs. 1,903.40). MR was significantly higher in neurotrauma patients (8.07%) than in non-neurotrauma patients (1.92%). Patients with severe head injuries (Glasgow Coma Scale ≤ 8) had the highest MR (32.27%). Conclusion Our study confirms that the TRISS method's misclassification issues observed at a single institution are prevalent across multiple RTCs in Korea. The accuracy of the TRISS method decreases with increasing injury severity, particularly in neurotrauma patients. These findings highlight the need to revise evaluation criteria and develop more accurate prediction models tailored to the Korean trauma care system. Implementing these changes will enhance the reliability of trauma care assessments and ensure more equitable support for RTCs, ultimately improving the quality and equity of trauma care in Korea.

Background: Assessing and improving the quality of trauma care is crucial in modern trauma systems and centers. In Korea, evaluations of regional trauma centers are conducted annually to assess and improve trauma management quality. This includes using the Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) method to calculate the W-score and mortality Observed-to-Expected ratio (O:E ratio), which are used to evaluate the quality of care. We analyzed the potential for overestimation of the probability of survival using TRISS method for patients with neurotrauma, as well as the potential for errors when evaluating and comparing regional trauma centers. Methods: We included patients who visited the regional trauma center between 2019 and 2021 and compared their probability of survival of the TRISS method, W-score, mortality O:E ratio, and misclassification rates. The patient groups were further subdivided into smaller subgroups based on age, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), and Injury Severity Score, and comparisons were made between the neurotrauma and non-neurotrauma groups within each subgroup. Results: A total of 4,045 patients were enrolled in the study, with 1,639 of them having neurotrauma. The neurotrauma patient group had a W-score of −0.68 and a mortality O:E ratio of 1.044. The misclassification rate was found to be 13.3%, and patients with a GCS of 8 or less had a higher misclassification rate of 37.4%. Conclusion The limitations of using the TRISS method for predicting outcomes in patients with severe neurotrauma are exposed in this study. The TRISS methodology demonstrated a high misclassification rate of approximately 40% in subgroups of patients with GCS less than 9, indicating that it may be less reliable in predicting outcomes for severely injured patients with low GCS. Clinicians and researchers should be cautious when using the TRISS method and consider alternative methods to evaluate patient outcomes and compare the quality of care provided by different trauma centers.

Objective: The Rotterdam scoring system (RSS) is useful for prognosis prediction in patients with severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI). It comprises basal cistern, midline shifting (MLS), epidural hematoma (EDH), and subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH)/intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) status. Brain computed tomography (CT) is important to assessing patients with sTBI; however, results often change over time. We aimed to determine whether RSS outcome prediction differs by initial brain CT scan time after the trauma in patients with sTBI. Methods: We used data from the second Korea Neurotrauma Data Bank, and analyzed 455 patients; RSS, Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended (GOSE) on 6-months, and the CT scan time were obtained. Unfavorable outcomes were defined as a GOSE score of 1–4. Participants were divided into 2 groups according to when brain CT scan was performed (> or ≤ 2 hours after trauma). The relationship between the prognosis of patients with sTBI and RSS score was examined by calculating the odds ratios. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Results: In both univariate and multivariate analysis, the total RSS and basal cistern status were statistically correlated with prognosis in both groups. EDH and SAH/IVH showed statistically significant difference according to CT scan time. MLS was associated with prognosis in both groups in univariate analysis although not in multivariate analysis. Conclusion The total RSS score predicted prognosis 6 months after trauma in patients with sTBI, regardless of CT scan time. However, the prognostic predictive power of each item constituting the RSS varied according to CT scan time.

Shunt malfunction is the most common cause of ventriculoperitoneal shunt failure. In literature, occlusion of the tube with brain parenchyma, choroid plexus, blood, and proteinaceous debris has been suggested as a mechanism of obstruction. We herein report a case of shunt malfunction without any identifiable occlusion. Our case findings suggest that unapparent abdominal pathology, including inflammation and fibrosis, should be considered when treating shunt failures.

Background: The Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) method is a widely used tool for assessing patient severity and predicting survival probability in trauma care. However, its accuracy and applicability in the Korean context, particularly for neurotrauma patients, have not been thoroughly validated yet. Previous studies at a single institution have identified significant discrepancies between TRISS predictions and actual outcomes, particularly in severe neurotrauma cases. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of the TRISS method on a national scale using data from multiple regional trauma centers (RTCs) in Korea. Methods: We utilized data from the Korea Trauma Data Bank collected from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2021. A total of 70,785 patients were selected based on specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. The probability of survival was calculated using the TRISS method.Patients were categorized into neurotrauma and non-neurotrauma groups. Misclassification rate (MR) was measured by comparing the predicted survival or death using the TRISS method with the actual outcomes to assess the predictive validity of the TRISS method. Results: This study included 28,285 neurotrauma patients and 42,503 non-neurotrauma patients. The neurotrauma group had higher actual deaths (2,401) than the non-neurotrauma group (809). The neurotrauma group also had a significantly higher mortality rate per 100,000 population (8,489.50 vs. 1,903.40). MR was significantly higher in neurotrauma patients (8.07%) than in non-neurotrauma patients (1.92%). Patients with severe head injuries (Glasgow Coma Scale ≤ 8) had the highest MR (32.27%). Conclusion Our study confirms that the TRISS method's misclassification issues observed at a single institution are prevalent across multiple RTCs in Korea. The accuracy of the TRISS method decreases with increasing injury severity, particularly in neurotrauma patients. These findings highlight the need to revise evaluation criteria and develop more accurate prediction models tailored to the Korean trauma care system. Implementing these changes will enhance the reliability of trauma care assessments and ensure more equitable support for RTCs, ultimately improving the quality and equity of trauma care in Korea.

Background: The Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) method is a widely used tool for assessing patient severity and predicting survival probability in trauma care. However, its accuracy and applicability in the Korean context, particularly for neurotrauma patients, have not been thoroughly validated yet. Previous studies at a single institution have identified significant discrepancies between TRISS predictions and actual outcomes, particularly in severe neurotrauma cases. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of the TRISS method on a national scale using data from multiple regional trauma centers (RTCs) in Korea. Methods: We utilized data from the Korea Trauma Data Bank collected from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2021. A total of 70,785 patients were selected based on specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. The probability of survival was calculated using the TRISS method.Patients were categorized into neurotrauma and non-neurotrauma groups. Misclassification rate (MR) was measured by comparing the predicted survival or death using the TRISS method with the actual outcomes to assess the predictive validity of the TRISS method. Results: This study included 28,285 neurotrauma patients and 42,503 non-neurotrauma patients. The neurotrauma group had higher actual deaths (2,401) than the non-neurotrauma group (809). The neurotrauma group also had a significantly higher mortality rate per 100,000 population (8,489.50 vs. 1,903.40). MR was significantly higher in neurotrauma patients (8.07%) than in non-neurotrauma patients (1.92%). Patients with severe head injuries (Glasgow Coma Scale ≤ 8) had the highest MR (32.27%). Conclusion Our study confirms that the TRISS method's misclassification issues observed at a single institution are prevalent across multiple RTCs in Korea. The accuracy of the TRISS method decreases with increasing injury severity, particularly in neurotrauma patients. These findings highlight the need to revise evaluation criteria and develop more accurate prediction models tailored to the Korean trauma care system. Implementing these changes will enhance the reliability of trauma care assessments and ensure more equitable support for RTCs, ultimately improving the quality and equity of trauma care in Korea.

OBJECTIVE: So far, there is no study answering the question of which type of surgical technique is practically the most useful in the treatment of adult patients with ischemic type moyamoya disease (MMD). We evaluated the efficacy of single barrel superficial temporal artery (STA)-middle cerebral artery (MCA) bypass in the treatment of adult patients with ischemic type MMD by retrospectively collecting clinical and radiological data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review identified 31 adult patients who underwent 43 single barrel STA-MCA bypass procedures performed for treatment of ischemic-type MMD between 2006 and 2014. The male to female ratio was 17:14 and the mean age was 41 years (range, 21-65 years). Peri-operative complications, angiographic and clinical outcomes were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: The permanent neurological morbidity and mortality rates were 2.3% and 0%, respectively. During the observation period of a mean of 35 months (range, 12-73 months), 29 patients (93.5%) had no further cerebrovascular events and transient ischemic attack occurred in two patients (6.5%), resulting in an annual stroke risk of 2.2%. Follow-up computed tomography perfusion (CTP) (mean, 18.4 months after surgery) documented improved cerebral hemodynamics in the revascularized hemispheres (p < 0.001). Post-operative patency was clearly verified in 38 bypasses (88.4%) of 43 bypasses on follow-up imaging (mean, 16.5 months). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that single barrel STA-MCA bypass with wide dural opening is safe and durable method of cerebral revascularization in adult patients with ischemic type MMD and can be considered as a potential treatment option for adult patients with ischemic type MMD.
Adult* ; Cerebral Arteries* ; Cerebral Revascularization ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Hemodynamics ; Humans ; Ischemia ; Ischemic Attack, Transient ; Male ; Methods ; Mortality ; Moyamoya Disease* ; Perfusion ; Retrospective Studies ; Stroke ; Temporal Arteries

OBJECTIVE: Preventable and potentially preventable traumatic death rates is a method to evaluate the preventability of the traumatic deaths in emergency medical department. To evaluate the preventability of the traumatic deaths in patients who were admitted to neurosurgery department, we performed this study. METHODS: A retrospective review identified 52 patients who admitted to neurosurgery department with severe traumatic brain injuries between 2013 and 2014. Based on radiologic and clinical state at emergency room, each preventability of death was estimated by professional panel discussion. And the final death rates were calculated. RESULTS: The preventable and potentially preventable traumatic death rates was 19.2% in this study. This result is lower than that of the research of 2012, Korean preventable and potentially preventable traumatic death rates. The rate of preventable and potentially preventable traumatic death of operation group is lower than that of conservative treatment group. Also, we confirmed that direct transfer and the time to operation are important to reduce the preventability. CONCLUSION: We report the preventable and potentially preventable traumatic death rates of our institute for evaluation of preventability in severe traumatic brain injuries during the last 2 years. For decrease of preventable death, we suggest that continuous survey of the death rate of traumatic brain injury patients is required.
Brain Injuries ; Emergencies ; Emergency Service, Hospital ; Humans ; Methods ; Mortality* ; Neurosurgery* ; Retrospective Studies