Article Sidebar

PDF (Tiếng Việt)
Published: 2022-02-14
Abstract Views: 687
Views PDF (Tiếng Việt): 443
DOI: https://doi.org/10.52852/tcncyh.v149i1.516
Issue
Vol. 149 No. 1 (2022)
Section
Các bài báo
How to Cite
Hiền, V. T. T., & Chính, L. Q. (2022). Predictive validity of the world federation of neurosurgical societies (wfns) grading scale for the poor outcome after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Journal of Medical Research, 149(1), 135-142. https://doi.org/10.52852/tcncyh.v149i1.516 (Original work published January 28, 2022)

Predictive validity of the world federation of neurosurgical societies (wfns) grading scale for the poor outcome after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage

Vuong Thi Thu Hien, Luong Quoc Chinh

Main Article Content

Abstract

This study aimed to determine the relation between the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies (WFNS) and Hunt and Hess (H&H) grading scales and the actual outcome and compared the prognostic accuracy of both scales. We retrieved data on all aneurysmal SAH patients admitted to three central hospitals in Hanoi, Vietnam between August 2019 and August 2020. Using logistic regression, we calculated odds ratio (OR) with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) for poor outcome at 90 days for each category in comparison with the lowest category of both scales. Areas under the curve of the corresponding receiver operator characteristic curve were calculated. We included 168 patients (≥ 18 years old). For the WFNS, OR ranged from 2.15 (95% CI, 0.50 - 9.20) to 37.44 (95% CI, 9.53 - 163.25) and increased less evenly than the H&H, with OR ranging from 0.85 (95% CI, 0.23 - 3.19) to 30.11 (95% CI, 8.66 - 104.75). Areas under the curve were 0.81 (95% CI, 0.73 - 0.88) for the WFNS and 0.81 (95% CI, 0.74 - 0.89) for the H&H. Both WFNS and H&H scales have a good discriminatory ability for patient prognosis. Because the OR of the WFNS increases less gradually, it is not preferable to the H&H scale.

Article Details

Keywords

Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage; Hunt and Hess grading scale; Intracranial hemorrhage; Intraventricular hemorrhage Stroke; WFNS grading scale.

References

1. Lawton MT, Vates GE. Subarachnoid Hemorrhage. The New England journal of medicine. 2017;377(3):257-266.
2. Nguyễn Ngọc Dương, Lương Quốc Chính. Đặc điểm lâm sàng và một số yếu tố tiên lượng bất lợi ở bệnh nhân chảy máu dưới nhện do vỡ phình động mạch não. Tạp chí Nghiên cứu Y học. 2020;128(4):131-143.
3. Hunt WE, Hess RM. Surgical risk as related to time of intervention in the repair of intracranial aneurysms. Journal of neurosurgery. 1968;28(1):14-20.
4. Nishioka H. Report on the cooperative study of intracranial aneurysms and subarachnoid hemorrhage. Section VII. I. Evaluation of the conservative management of ruptured intracranial aneurysms. Journal of neurosurgery. 1966;25(5):574-592.
5. The World Federation of Neurological Surgeons (WFNS) Committee. Report of World Federation of Neurological Surgeons Committee on a Universal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Grading Scale. Journal of neurosurgery. 1988;68(6):985-986.
6. Lindsay KW, Teasdale G, Knill-Jones RP, Murray L. Observer variability in grading patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage. Journal of neurosurgery. 1982;56(5):628-633.
7. Lindsay KW, Teasdale GM, Knill-Jones RP. Observer variability in assessing the clinical features of subarachnoid hemorrhage. Journal of neurosurgery. 1983;58(1):57-62.
8. Luong CQ, Ngo HM, Hoang HB, et al. Clinical characteristics and factors relating to poor outcome in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage in Vietnam: A multicenter prospective cohort study. PloS one. 2021;16(8):e0256150.
9. Rankin J. Cerebral vascular accidents in patients over the age of 60. II. Prognosis. Scottish medical journal. 1957;2(5):200-215.
10. Bonita R, Beaglehole R. Recovery of motor function after stroke. Stroke; a journal of cerebral circulation. 1988;19(12):1497-1500.
11. van Swieten JC, Koudstaal PJ, Visser MC, Schouten HJ, van Gijn J. Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients. Stroke; a journal of cerebral circulation. 1988;19(5):604-607.
12. Luong CQ, Nguyen AD, Nguyen CV, et al. Effectiveness of Combined External Ventricular Drainage with Intraventricular Fibrinolysis for the Treatment of Intraventricular Haemorrhage with Acute Obstructive Hydrocephalus. Cerebrovascular Diseases Extra. 2019;9(2):77-89.
13. Mackey J, Khoury JC, Alwell K, et al. Stable incidence but declining case-fatality rates of subarachnoid hemorrhage in a population. Neurology. 2016;87(21):2192-2197.
14. Øie LR, Solheim O, Majewska P, et al. Incidence and case fatality of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage admitted to hospital between 2008 and 2014 in Norway. Acta neurochirurgica. 2020;162(9):2251-2259.
15. Do SN, Luong CQ, Pham DT, et al. Survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, Viet Nam: multicentre prospective cohort study. Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 2021;99(1):50-61.
16. van Heuven AW, Dorhout Mees SM, Algra A, Rinkel GJ. Validation of a prognostic subarachnoid hemorrhage grading scale derived directly from the Glasgow Coma Scale. Stroke; a journal of cerebral circulation. 2008;39(4):1347-1348.
17. Sano H, Satoh A, Murayama Y, et al. Modified World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies subarachnoid hemorrhage grading system. World neurosurgery. 2015;83(5):801-807.
18. Fung C, Inglin F, Murek M, et al. Reconsidering the logic of World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies grading in patients with severe subarachnoid hemorrhage. Journal of neurosurgery. 2016;124(2):299-304.