Prognostic Value of Initial Diagnostic Imaging Findings for Patient Outcomes in Adult Patients with Traumatic Brain...

Termed the "silent epidemic," traumatic brain injury (TBI) is one of the greatest global contributors not only to post-traumatic death but also to post-traumatic long-term disability. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to specifically evaluate the prognostic value of features on initial imaging completed within 24 h of arrival in adult patients with TBI.

The authors followed the PRISMA 2020 checklist for systematic review and meta-analysis design and reporting. Comprehensive searches of the Medline and Embase databases were carried out. Two independent readers extracted the following demographic, clinical and imaging information using a predetermined data abstraction form. Statistics were performed using Revman 5.4.1 and R version 4.2.0. For pooled data in meta-analysis, forest plots for sensitivity and specificity were created to calculate the diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). Summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves were generated using a bivariate model, and diagnostic accuracy was determined using pooled sensitivity and specificity as well as the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC).

There were 10,733 patients over the 19 studies. Overall, most of the studies included had high levels of bias in multiple, particularly when it came to selection bias in patient sampling, bias in controlling for confounders, and reporting bias, such as in reporting missing data. Only subdural hematoma (SDH) and mortality in all TBI patients had both an AUC with 95% CI not crossing 0.5 and a DOR with 95% CI not crossing 1, at 0.593 (95% CI: 0.556-0.725) and 2.755 (95% CI: 1.474-5.148), respectively.

In meta-analysis, only SDH with mortality in all TBI patients had a moderate but significant association. Given the small number of studies, additional research focused on initial imaging, particularly for imaging modalities other than NECT, is required in order to confirm the findings of our meta-analysis and to further evaluate the association of imaging findings and outcome.