The Predictive Value of Different Intracerebral Hemorrhage Scores and Ultraearly Hematoma Growth for 30-day Mortality in Patients with Intracerebral Hemorrhage

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1673-5765.2023.02.010

Abstract

Abstract: Objective To investigate the predictive value of original intracerebral hemorrhage scale (OICH), intracerebral hemorrhage-grading scale (ICH-GS), intracerebral hemorrhage functional outcome score (ICH-FOS), modified emergency department intracerebral scale (MEDICH) and ultraearly hematoma growth (uHG) for 30-day mortality in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH).
Methods This study enrolled the consecutive ICH patients from the ICH Registry Study from January 2014 to September 2016. The collected data included the baseline information, physical examination, laboratory examinations, ICH location and volume, complications during the hospital stay, and 30-day follow-up. The patients were divided into survival group and death group according to the 30-day follow-up after ICH onset. Logistic regression analysis was used to analyze the effect of different ICH scores on 30-day outcome. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was used to analyze the predictive value of ICH scores alone, and ICH score combined with uHG for 30-day ICH outcome.
Results A total of 1 664 ICH patients were finally included in this study. There were 308 deaths and 1 356 survivals at 30-day follow-up. Logistic regression analysis showed that the scores of OICH, ICH- GS, ICH-FOS and MEDICH scores and uHG in death group were all higher than that in survival group, with statistical differences. Analyzing the effect of uHG on 30-day mortality in different subgroups, the results showed that uHG were all correlated with the 30-day mortality in different ICH volume, sex and age subgroups, while in ICH location subgroup, uHG was correlated with the 30-day mortality only in supratentorial ICH, and they were not correlated in subtentorial ICH (all P<0.05). The AUC of ICH-FOS prediction for 30-day outcome was the largest among all scores (AUC=0.8599). Compared to the ICH-FOS alone, ICH-FOS combined with uHG had a higher predictive value for 30-day outcome.
Conclusion The commonly used ICH scores all had a good predictive value for 30-day outcome in ICH patients. ICH-FOS score combined with uHG had a higher predictive value for 30-day ICH outcome than the ICH-FOS alone.

Key words: Intracerebral hemorrhage; Score; Ultraearly hematoma growth; Prognosis

摘要： 目的探讨原始脑出血评分（original intracerebral hemorrhage scale，OICH）、脑出血分级量表（ICH-grading scale，ICH-GS）、脑出血功能结局量表（ICH functional outcome score，ICH-FOS）、改良急诊脑出血评分量表（modified emergency department intracerebral scale，MEDICH）及超早期血肿生长速度（ultraearly hematoma growth，uHG）对脑出血患者短期死亡风险的预测价值。
方法收集2014年1月—2016年9月脑出血登记研究中急性脑出血患者的一般临床资料、既往病史、入院后首次实验室检查结果、血压、脑出血部位、血肿体积、住院期间并发症情况。对患者进行发病30 d随访，根据全因死亡情况，将患者分为死亡组和存活组，比较两组间基线资料、uHG（基线血肿体积/发病到基线CT的时间）和不同脑出血评分。通过单因素logistic回归分析判断不同脑出血评分对患者30 d生存结局的影响，进一步通过生存曲线的AUC比较不同评分及联合uHG对30 d死亡的预测效能。
结果研究共纳入脑出血患者1664例，30 d随访死亡308例，存活1356例。单因素logistic回归分析显示，死亡组的OICH、ICH-GS、ICH-FOS、MEDICH各项得分及uHG均高于存活组，差异具有统计学意义。根据出血部位、性别、年龄、出血量进行亚组分析，除幕下出血组外，其余亚组的uHG与30 d死亡均相关（均P<0.05）。计算AUC发现，ICH-FOS对患者短期死亡结局的预测价值最高，AUC=0.8599。分析uHG联合ICH-FOS的预测价值，发现对患者结局预测价值较单独ICH-FOS的效能更高（按照uHG是否大于本研究中均值分别赋值0和1，与ICH-FOS其他指标联合构成脑出血功能结局量表-血肿生长速度评分1，AUC=8604；按照uHG四分位数区间分别赋值0、1、2、3，与ICH-FOS其他指标联合构成脑出血功能结局量表-血肿生长速度评分2，AUC=0.8652）。
结论不同的常见脑出血预后评分与急性脑出血患者短期生存结局均明显相关且均有较好的预测效能。uHG联合ICH-FOS评分对脑出血患者短期生存结局较单独ICH-FOS评分具有更高的预测价值。

关键词: 脑出血; 评分; 超早期血肿生长速度; 预后

SHEN Yuan, WANG Dandan, KANG Kaijiang, ZHAO Xingquan.

The Predictive Value of Different Intracerebral Hemorrhage Scores and Ultraearly Hematoma Growth for 30-day Mortality in Patients with Intracerebral Hemorrhage

[J]. Chinese Journal of Stroke, 2023, 18(02): 201-207.

申园, 王丹丹, 康开江, 赵性泉. 不同评分系统及血肿生长速度对脑出血患者短期死亡风险的预测价值研究[J]. 中国卒中杂志, 2023, 18(02): 201-207.

References

[1] COLLABORATORS GBDS. Global，regional，and national burden of stroke，1990-2016：a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2016[J]. Lancet Neurol，2019，18（5）：439-458.
[2] COLLABORATORS GBDCOD. Global，regional，and national age-sex specific mortality for 264 causes of death，1980-2016：a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2016[J]. Lancet，2017，390（10100）：1151-1210.
[3] WU S M，WU B，LIU M，et al. Stroke in China：advances and challenges in epidemiology，prevention，and management[J]. Lancet Neurol，2019，18（4）：394-405.
[4] VAN ASCH C J，LUITSE M J，RINKEL G J，et al. Incidence，case fatality，and functional outcome of intracerebral haemorrhage over time，according to age，sex，and ethnic origin：a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Lancet Neurol，2010，9（2）：167-176.
[5] 王拥军，李子孝，谷鸿秋，等. 中国卒中报告2020（中文版）（1）[J]. 中国卒中杂志，2022，17（5）：433-447.
[6] HEMPHILL J C，BONOVICH D C，BESMERTIS L，et al. The ICH score：a simple，reliable grading scale for intracerebral hemorrhage[J]. Stroke，2001，32（4）：891-897.
[7] RUIZ-SANDOVAL J L，CHIQUETE E，ROMERO-VARGAS S，et al. Grading scale for prediction of outcome in primary intracerebral hemorrhages[J]. Stroke，2007，38（5）：1641-1644.
[8] JI R J，SHEN H P，PAN Y S，et al. A novel risk score to predict 1-year functional outcome after intracerebral hemorrhage and comparison with existing scores[J/OL]. Crit Care，2013，17（6）：R275[2022-10-11]. https://doi.org/10.1186/cc13130.
[9] ZIS P，LEIVADEAS P，TAVERNARAKIS A. EDICH；a novel grading scale for predicting the 30-day case fatality of primary inoperable intracerebral hemorrhage[J]. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis，2015，24（5）：1104-1105.
[10] WANG W J，LU J J，LIU L P，et al. Ultraearly hematoma growth in acute spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage predicts early and long-term poor clinical outcomes：a prospective，observational cohort study[J/OL]. Front Neurol，2021，12：747551[2022-10-11]. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2021.747551.
[11] RODRIGUEZ-LUNA D，COSCOJUELA P，RUBIERA M，et al. Ultraearly hematoma growth in active intracerebral hemorrhage[J]. Neurology，2016，87（4）：357-364.
[12] WANG D D，WANG W J，WANG A X，et al. Association of severity and prognosis with elevated homocysteine levels in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage[J/OL]. Front Neurol，2020，11：571585[2022-10-11]. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2020.571585.
[13] Stroke--1989. Recommendations on stroke prevention，diagnosis，and therapy. Report of the who task force on stroke and other cerebrovascular disorders[J]. Stroke，1989，20（10）：1407-1431.
[14] 冯皓，王鑫，王文娟，等. 不同性别老年脑出血患者血脂水平与预后的关系研究[J]. 中国卒中杂志，2021，16（10）：1016-1022.
[15] FUJII Y，TANAKA R，TAKEUCHI S，et al. Hematoma enlargement in spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage[J]. J Neurosurg，1994，80（1）：51-57.
[16] KAZUI S，NARITOMI H，YAMAMOTO H，et al. Enlargement of spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage. Incidence and time course[J]. Stroke，1996，27（10）：1783-1787.
[17] QURESHI A I，TUHRIM S，BRODERICK J P，et al. Spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage[J]. N Engl J Med，2001，344（19）：1450-1460.
[18] MIWA K，KOGA M，FUKUDA-DOI M，et al. Effect of heart rate variabilities on outcome after acute intracerebral hemorrhage：a post hoc analysis of ATACH-2[J/OL]. J Am Heart Assoc，2021，10（16）：e020364[2022-10-11]. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.120.020364.
[19] MAZZOLENI V，PADOVANI A，MOROTTI A. Emergency management of intracerebral hemorrhage[J/OL]. J Crit Care，2023，74：154232[2022-10-11]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrc.2022.154232.
[20] GIL-GARCIA C A，FLORES-ALVAREZ E，CEBRIAN-GARCIA R，et al. Essential topics about the imaging diagnosis and treatment of hemorrhagic stroke：a comprehensive review of the 2022 AHA guidelines[J]. Curr Probl Cardiol，2022，47（11）：101328.
[21] LI J H，LIAO X，YU Z Y，et al. Predictive ability of ultraearly hematoma growth and spot sign for redefined hematoma expansion in patients with spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage[J]. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis，2021，30（9）：105950.
[22] LEI K L，WEI S，LIU X J，et al. Combination of ultraearly hematoma growth and hypodensities for outcome prediction after intracerebral hemorrhage[J/OL]. World Neurosurg，2020，135：e610-e615[2022-10-11]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2019.12.069.