Background: Malnutrition is frequently underdiagnosed in geriatric patients and is considered to be a contributing factor for worse outcomes during hospitalization. In addition, elderly patients who undergo trauma are often malnourished at the time of incurring fractures. The geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI), calculated based on the serum albumin level and the ratio of present body weight to ideal body weight, was proposed for the assessment of the nutritional status of elderly patients with various illnesses. This study aimed to investigate whether the GNRI has a prognostic value that links the nutritional status and mortality outcomes of elderly patients who have previously undergone trauma with femoral fractures. Methods: From January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2019, a total of 678 elderly patients with femoral fractures were categorized into four nutritional risk groups: a major-risk group (GNRI < 82; group 1, n = 127), moderate-risk group (GNRI 82–92; group 2, n = 179), low-risk group (GNRI 92–98; group 3, n = 123), and no-risk group (GNRI > 98; group 4, n = 249). To minimize the confounding effects of sex, age, preexisting comorbidities, and injury severity of patients on outcome measurements, propensity score-matched patient cohorts were created to assess the impact of patients being in different nutritional risk groups on the in-hospital mortality outcomes against the no-risk group. Results: The patients in groups 1–3 were significantly older and presented a significantly lower body mass index and lower serum albumin levels than those in group 4. Compared with patients in group 4 (3.6%), a significantly higher mortality rate was found in the patients in group 1 (17.3%, p < 0.001), but not in those in group 2 (6.7%) or group 3 (2.4%). The study of propensity score-matched patient cohorts provided similar results; group 1 patients had significantly higher odds of mortality than group 4 patients (odds ratio, 6.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.34–29.37; p = 0.009), but there were no significant differences in mortality risks among patients in groups 2 and 3 compared with those in group 4. Conclusions: This preliminary study suggested that the GNRI may be used as a screening tool to identify patients with malnutrition at a high risk of mortality among elderly patients with femoral fractures. A prospective study is needed to validate the suggestion.

The geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI) is a simple and efficient tool to assess the nutritional status of patients with malignancies or after surgery. Because trauma patients constitute a specific population that generally acquires accidental and acute injury, this study aimed to identify the association between the GNRI at admission and mortality outcomes of older trauma patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). Methods: The study population included 700 older trauma patients admitted to the ICU between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2019. The collected data included age, sex, body mass index (BMI), albumin level at admission, preexisting comorbidities, injury severity score (ISS), and in-hospital mortality. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify the independent effects of univariate predictive variables resulting in mortality in our study population. The study population was categorized into four nutritional risk groups: a major-risk group (GNRI < 82; n = 128), moderate-risk group (GNRI 82 to <92; n = 191), low-risk group (GNRI 92–98; n = 136), and no-risk group (GNRI > 98; n = 245). Results: There was no significant difference in sex predominance, age, and BMI between the mortality (n = 125) and survival (n = 575) groups. The GNRI was significantly lower in the mortality group than in the survival group (89.8 ± 12.9 vs. 94.2 ± 12.0, p < 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the GNRI (odds ratio—OR, 0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95–0.99; p = 0.001), preexisting end-stage renal disease (OR, 3.6; 95% CI, 1.70–7.67; p = 0.001), and ISS (OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 1.05–1.10; p < 0.001) were significant independent risk factors for mortality. Compared to the patients in group of GNRI > 98, those patients in group of GNRI < 82 presented a significantly higher mortality rate (26.6% vs. 13.1%; p < 0.001) and length of stay in hospital (26.5 days vs. 20.9 days; p = 0.016). Conclusions: This study demonstrated that GNRI is a significant independent risk factor and a promising simple screening tool to identify the subjects with malnutrition associated with higher risk for mortality in those ICU elderly trauma patients.

Background: In recent years, several versions of the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) were updated and published. It was reported that the codeset in the dictionary of AIS-2005 had significant change from that of AIS-1998. This study was designed to evaluate the potential impact of adapting the AIS-2005 codeset from the AIS-1998 in an established trauma system of a single level I trauma center. The patients’ outcome was measured in different Injury Severity Score (ISS) strata according to the double-coded injuries in a three-year period. Methods: The double-coded injuries sustained by 7520 trauma patients between 1 January, 2016, and 31 December, 2018, in a level I trauma center were used to compare the patient injury characteristics and outcomes between AIS-1998 and AIS-2005 and under different ISS strata, defined as <16 (mild to moderate injury), 16–24 (severe injury), and >24 (critical injury). Results: The mean ISS was significantly lower using AIS-2005 than using AIS-1998 (7.5 ± 6.3 vs. 8.3 ± 7.1, respectively, p < 0.001). AIS-2005 scores in the body regions of the head/neck (2.94 ± 1.08 vs. 3.40 ± 1.15, respectively, p < 0.001) and extremity (2.19 ± 0.56 vs. 2.24 ± 0.58, respectively, p < 0.001), but not in other body regions, were significantly lower than AIS-1998 scores. The critically injured patients (ISS >24), but not severely injured patients or patients with mild-to-moderate injury, coded by AIS-2005 had a significantly higher mortality rate (34.2% vs. 26.2%, respectively, p = 0.031) than did patients coded by AIS-1998. The rate of intensive care unit admission was significantly higher for patients in all ISS strata after adapting AIS-2005 as the scoring system than after adapting AIS-1998. Regarding patients with major trauma, which was defined as ISS > 15, the number of patients with major trauma in this study was 17.0% (n = 1276) for AIS-1998 and 9.7% (n = 733) for AIS-2005. As a consequence, the mortality rate of patients with major trauma was significantly higher in AIS-2005 than in AIS-1998 (15.4% vs. 9.1%, respectively, p < 000.1). Conclusions: In this study, we revealed that the adaptation of AIS-2005 from AIS-1998 had resulted in a significant decrease of severity scores in the measurement of the same injuries. The number of head/neck injuries classified as 16–24 was the key difference between AIS-1998 and AIS-2005. Furthermore, critically injured patients who had ISS > 24 coded by AIS-2005 had significantly higher mortality rates than did the patients coded by AIS-1998. This study also indicated that a direct comparison of the measurements that are generated from these two AIS versions can produce misleading results.

Background: Prediction of mortality outcomes in trauma patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) is important for patient care and quality improvement. We aimed to measure the performance of 11 prognostic scoring systems for predicting mortality outcomes in trauma patients in the ICU. Methods: Prospectively registered data in the Trauma Registry System from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2018 were used to extract scores from prognostic scoring systems for 1554 trauma patients in the ICU. The following systems were used: the Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS); the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II); the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II); mortality prediction models (MPM II) at admission, 24, 48, and 72 h; the Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score (MODS); the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA); the Logistic Organ Dysfunction Score (LODS); and the Three Days Recalibrated ICU Outcome Score (TRIOS). Predictive performance was determined according to the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC). Results: MPM II at 24 h had the highest AUC (0.9213), followed by MPM II at 48 h (AUC: 0.9105). MPM II at 24, 48, and 72 h (0.8956) had a significantly higher AUC than the TRISS (AUC: 0.8814), APACHE II (AUC: 0.8923), SAPS II (AUC: 0.9044), MPM II at admission (AUC: 0.9063), MODS (AUC: 0.8179), SOFA (AUC: 0.7073), LODS (AUC: 0.9013), and TRIOS (AUC: 0.8701). There was no significant difference in the predictive performance of MPM II at 24 and 48 h (p = 0.37) or at 72 h (p = 0.10). Conclusions: We compared 11 prognostic scoring systems and demonstrated that MPM II at 24 h had the best predictive performance for 1554 trauma patients in the ICU.

Background: Hyperglycemia at the time of hospital admission is associated with higher morbidity and mortality rates in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Using data from the Chang Gung Research Database (CGRD), this study aimed to compare mortality outcomes between patients with stress-induced hyperglycemia (SIH), diabetic hyperglycemia (DH), and nondiabetic normoglycemia (NDN). The study occurred at Keelung, Linkou, Chiayi, and Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospitals (CGMHs). Methods: A total of 1166, 6318, 3622, and 5599 health records from Keelung, Linkou, Chiayi, and Kaohsiung CGMHs, respectively, were retrieved from the CGRD for hospitalized patients with TBI between January 2001 and December 2015. After propensity score matching for sex, age, and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score, the matched cohorts were compared to evaluate differences in the primary outcome between patients with SIH, DH, and NDN. In-hospital mortality was the primary outcome. Results: The analysis of matched patient populations revealed that at the Kaohsiung CGMH, patients with SIH had 1.63-fold (95% CI: 1.09–2.44; p = 0.017) and 1.91-fold (95% CI: 1.12–3.23; p = 0.017) higher odds of mortality than patients with NDN and DH, respectively. Similar patterns were found at the Linkou CGMH; patients with SIH had higher odds of mortality than patients with NDN and DH. In contrast, at the Keelung CGMH, patients with SIH had significantly higher odds of mortality than those with NDN (OR: 3.25; 95% CI: 1.06–9.97; p = 0.039). At the Chiayi CGMH, there were no significant differences in mortality rates among all groups. Conclusions: This study’s results suggest that SIH and DH differ in their effect on the outcomes of patients with TBI. The results were similar between medical centers but not nonmedical centers; in the medical centers, patients with SIH had significantly higher odds of mortality than patients with either NDN or DH.

No abstract

Traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) is the second most frequent intracranial hemorrhage and a common radiologic finding in computed tomography. This study aimed to estimate the risk of mortality in adult trauma patients with traumatic SAH concurrent with other types of intracranial hemorrhage, such as subdural hematoma (SDH), epidural hematoma (EDH), and intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), compared to the risk in patients with isolated traumatic SAH. We searched our hospital’s trauma database from 1 January, 2009 to 31 December, 2018 to identify hospitalized adult patients ≥20 years old who presented with a trauma abbreviated injury scale (AIS) of ≥3 in the head region. Polytrauma patients with an AIS of ≥3 in any other region of the body were excluded. A total of 1856 patients who had SAH were allocated into four exclusive groups: (Group I) isolated traumatic SAH, n = 788; (Group II) SAH and one diagnosis, n = 509; (Group III) SAH and two diagnoses, n = 493; and (Group IV) SAH and three diagnoses, n = 66. One, two, and three diagnoses indicated occurrences of one, two, or three other types of intracranial hemorrhage (SDH, EDH, or ICH). The adjusted odds ratio with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of the level of mortality was calculated with logistic regression, controlling for sex, age, and pre-existing comorbidities. Patients with isolated traumatic SAH had a lower rate of mortality (1.8%) compared to the other three groups (Group II: 7.9%, Group III: 12.4%, and Group IV: 27.3%, all p < 0.001). When controlling for sex, age, and pre-existing comorbidities, we found that Group II, Group III, and Group IV patients had a 4.0 (95% CI 2.4–6.5), 8.9 (95% CI 4.8–16.5), and 21.1 (95% CI 9.4–47.7) times higher adjusted odds ratio for mortality, respectively, than the patients with isolated traumatic SAH. In this study, we demonstrated that compared to patients with isolated traumatic SAH, traumatic SAH patients with concurrent types of intracranial hemorrhage have a higher adjusted odds ratio for mortality.

Background: Identification of malnutrition is especially important in severely injured patients, in whom hypermetabolism and protein catabolism following traumatic injury worsen their nutritional condition. The geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI), based on serum albumin level and the current body weight/ideal body weight ratio, is useful for identifying patients with malnutrition in many clinical conditions. This study aimed to explore the association between admission GNRI and mortality outcomes of adult patients with polytrauma. Methods: From 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2019, a total of 348 adult patients with polytrauma, registered in the trauma database of a level I trauma center, were recognized and categorized into groups of death (n = 71) or survival (n = 277) and into four nutritional risk groups: a high-risk group (GNRI < 82, n = 87), a moderate-risk group (GNRI 82 to <92, n = 144), a low-risk group (GNRI 92–98, n = 59), and a no-risk group (GNRI > 98, n = 58). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify the independent risk factors for mortality. The mortality outcomes of patients at various nutritional risks were compared to those of patients in the no-risk group. Results: The comparison between the death group (n = 71) and the survival group (n = 277) revealed that there was no significant difference in gender predominance, age, pre-existing comorbidities, injury mechanism, systolic blood pressure, and respiratory rate upon arrival at the emergency room. A significantly lower GNRI and Glasgow Coma Scale score but higher injury severity score (ISS) was observed in the death group than in the survival group. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), odds ratio (OR), 0.88; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.83–0.95; p < 0.001), ISS (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04–1.11; p < 0.001), and GNRI (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.91–0.97; p < 0.001) were significant independent risk factors for mortality in these patients. The mortality rates for the high-risk, moderate-risk, low-risk, and no-risk groups were 34.5%, 20.1%, 8.5%, and 12.1%, respectively. Unlike patients in the moderate-risk and low-risk groups, patients in the high-risk group had a significantly higher death rate than that of those in the no-risk group. Conclusions: This study revealed that the GNRI may serve as a simple, promising screening tool to identify the high risk of malnutrition for mortality in adult patients with polytrauma.