J Neurosurg Pediatr Article p595
J Neurosurg Pediatr Article p595
J Neurosurg Pediatr Article p595
Objective Penetrating brain injury in civilians is much less common than blunt brain injury but is more severe over-
all. Gunshot wounds (GSWs) cause high morbidity and mortality related to penetrating brain injury; however, there are
few reports on the management and outcome of intracranial GSWs in children. The goals of this study were to identify
clinical and radiological factors predictive for death in children and to externally validate a recently proposed pediatric
prognostic scale.
Methods The authors conducted a retrospective review of penetrating, isolated GSWs sustained in children whose
ages ranged from birth to 18 years and who were treated at 2 major metropolitan Level 1 trauma centers from 1996
through 2013. Several standard clinical, laboratory, and radiological factors were analyzed for their ability to predict
death in these patients. The authors then applied the St. Louis Scale for Pediatric Gunshot Wounds to the Head, a
scoring algorithm that was designed to provide rapid prognostic information for emergency management decisions.
The scale’s sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictability were determined, with death as the primary
outcome.
Results Seventy-one children (57 male, 14 female) had a mean age of 14 years (range 19 months to 18 years). Over-
all mortality among these children was 47.9%, with 81% of survivors attaining a favorable clinical outcome (Glasgow Out-
come Scale score ≥ 4). A number of predictors of mortality were identified (all p < 0.05): 1) bilateral fixed pupils; 2) deep
nuclear injury; 3) transventricular projectile trajectory; 4) bihemispheric injury; 5) injury to ≥ 3 lobes; 6) systolic blood
pressure < 100 mm Hg; 7) anemia (hematocrit < 30%); 8) Glasgow Coma Scale score ≤ 5; and 9) a blood base deficit
< -5 mEq/L. Patient age, when converted to a categorical variable (0–9 or 10–18 years), was not predictive. Based on
data from the 71 patients in this study, the positive predictive value of the St. Louis scale in predicting death (score ≥ 5)
was 78%.
Conclusions This series of pediatric cranial GSWs underscores the importance of the initial clinical exam and CT
studies along with adequate resuscitation to make the appropriate management decision(s). Based on our population,
the St. Louis Scale seems to be more useful as a predictor of who will survive than who will succumb to their injury.
http://thejns.org/doi/abs/10.3171/2015.7.PEDS15285
Key Words pediatric intracranial gunshot wound; survival; traumatic brain injury; pediatric management; trauma
U
nfortunately, intracranial ballistic injuries due to be rising. For instance, from 2004 to 2008, the mortality
firearms, most commonly inflicted by low-velocity rate from intracranial GSWs (all ages) was 6.10 deaths per
handguns, are not uncommon events at many ma- 100,000 population (http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/
jor US metropolitan Level 1 trauma centers. They often index.html). In the years 2004–2010, this rate rose to
lead to severe neurological injury or death. Adult mortal- 6.34 deaths per 100,000 population. Unfortunately, the
ity rates from such injuries range between 50% and 90% same trend was noted for pediatric patients (1.31 deaths
in most series.1,6,9,10,12,13,15,20,27,31 Data from the Centers for per 100,000 population in 2004–2008 vs 1.42 deaths per
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) suggest that deaths 100,000 population in 2004–2010). In fact, firearm injury
due to intracranial gunshot wounds (GSWs) in the US may was the fifth leading violent cause of hospitalization for
Abbreviations GCS = Glasgow Coma Scale; GOS = Glasgow Outcome Scale; GSW = gunshot wound; ICP = intracranial pressure; INR = international normalized
ratio; SBP = systolic blood pressure.
submitted May 8, 2015. accepted July 28, 2015.
include when citing Published online January 5, 2016; DOI: 10.3171/2015.7.PEDS15285.
TABLE 4. Bivariate testing of clinical and radiological criteria TABLE 6. Evaluation of the St. Louis scale
Variable Survived Died NNT p Value Statistic Value 95% CI
ICP >30 cm H2O 2 4 16 0.4077 Sensitivity 94.12% 80.29%–99.11%
GCS score* Specificity 75.68% 58.80%–88.20%
3–5 6 31 2 <0.0001† Positive likelihood ratio* 3.87 2.18–6.87
6–8 7 3 5 0.2219 Negative likelihood ratio† 0.08 0.02–0.30
Bilat fixed pupils 2 25 2 <0.0001† Death prevalence 47.89% 35.88%–60.08%
SBP <100 mm Hg 2 13 4 0.009† PPV 78.05% 62.38%–89.42%
Hematocrit <30% 4 13 4 0.006† NPV 93.33% 77.89%–98.99%
Base deficit <−5.0 mEq/L 5 15 4 0.0038† NPV = negative predictive value; PPV = positive predictive value.
INR >1.5 2 3 12 0.0962 * Positive test defined as St. Louis score ≥ 5.
Deep nuclear/3rd ventricular 10 26 2 <0.0001† † Negative test defined as St. Louis score ≤ 4.
injury
Mixed supra-/infratentorial injury 2 6 8 0.1346 nificant association between a GCS score ≤ 5 and over-
Injury to ≥3 lobes 10 19 4 0.0084† all mortality, we do not recommend using a strict GCS
Transventricular trajectory 5 26 2 <0.0001†
cutoff score alone because of the potential inaccuracy of
the admission GCS score in a patient whose neurological
Bihemispheric injury 5 26 2 <0.0001† function is depressed iatrogenically or in response to inad-
Midline shift 19 22 7 0.1697 equate volume resuscitation or hypothermia. In agreement
Age in yrs with other authors, we found a strong association between
0–9 5 5 41 0.8853 bilaterally fixed pupils and death.10,23,26 The significant as-
10–18 32 29 41 0.8853 sociation of anemia (hematocrit < 30%) and intravascular
volume depletion (base deficit < -5 mEq/L) with mortal-
NNT = number needed to treat. ity reflects the critical importance of rapid correction with
* All patients with GCS score > 8 survived. fluid and/or blood. Coagulopathy at presentation (INR >
† Statistically significant.
1.5) was not significantly associated with death, probably
given the fact that temporary coagulopathy is not as po-
of the largest series known to us is by Levy et al., which tentially damaging to the at-risk brain as hypotension and
comprised 105 children treated at the University of South- that the coagulopathy can usually be readily reversed with
ern California/Los Angeles County Medical Center.17 The transfusion of plasma. The lack of an association between
majority of the children in that series (72%) were treated intracranial hypertension (ICP > 30 cm H2O) and death
for gang-related injuries, and patient age, sex, GCS score, is due to inadequate data given our bias for upfront sur-
projectile entry site, and bihemispheric injury were pre- gery versus ICP monitoring. Although preoperative ICP
dictive variables. monitoring was rarely performed, it was routinely used
We found that certain clinical (admission GCS score postoperatively.
≤ 5, bilateral fixed and dilated pupils), laboratory (initial Similar to the radiological criteria set forth in the St.
hematocrit < 30%, base deficit < -5 mEq/L), and CT (deep Louis scale, our data support the ominous findings of
nuclear/third ventricular injury, injury to ≥ 3 lobes, trans- deep nuclear/third ventricular injury and transventricu-
ventricular injury, bihemispheric injury) results were sta- lar trajectory. The predictive value of transventricular
tistically associated with death. An age less than 9 years, and transhemispheric missile injuries has been reported
an initial ICP > 30 cm H2O (or mm Hg), both supra- and extensively in the literature on adults.4,5,8,13,14,25,26,28 Mixed
infratentorial injury, and midline shift were not predictive. supratentorial/infratentorial injury did not reach statisti-
Several other reports emphasize the importance of the cal significance—again because of a lack of data—but it
GCS score at presentation in management decision mak- should be noted that this injury was associated with 75%
ing.5,7,8,10,16,17,22,23,26 While our data do demonstrate a sig- mortality. In contrast to Bandt et al.,2 we found that mid-
line shift was not associated with mortality. This finding
may be attributable to the fact that this criterion was a bi-
TABLE 5. St. Louis Scale for Pediatric Gunshot Wounds to the nary variable (yes/no) as opposed to a cutoff value. For ex-
Head scores in 71 patients with GSWs ample, a midline shift > 5 mm is a more significant finding
Group Mean Score (range) than a shift of 1–2 mm. Furthermore, as stated previously,
our threshold in performing a craniectomy was low, which
Survivors 2.8 (0–12) meant that children with midline shift were often rapidly
GOS Score 2 12 (NA) taken for decompression, which would have relieved the
GOS Score 3 8.5 (0–12) midline shift and intracranial hypertension to a greater
GOS Score 4 2.8 (0–9) degree than medical management.
GOS Score 5 0.4 (0–2)
Another important but often immeasurable factor in
determining the extent of tissue damage and neurological
Nonsurvivors 10 (3–14) injury is the muzzle energy, which is the kinetic energy of
NA = not applicable. the projectile upon exiting the barrel of the weapon. It is
directly proportional to the weight (or “grain”) of the bul- nately, the more difficult decisions involve the children
let, but more importantly the velocity as kinetic energy = whose St. Louis scale score is greater than 5.
1/2 × mass × velocity2. The greater energy the projectile
has upon impact, the greater energy that is dissipated to Study Limitations
the surrounding tissue, causing cavitation injury. It is rare A retrospective study design is always touted as a limi-
that the actual bullet is recovered from the patient, and if tation, but it is difficult to conduct a prospective single-
it is, it is often a small-caliber bullet (0.22 to 0.38 caliber) center study on an event that occurs with an average fre-
from a low-muzzle-velocity weapon (900 to 1300 ft/sec).5 quency of 4 patients per year. Even though our series is
In the pediatric population, published mortality rates one of the larger ones, it still has a relatively small number
from intracranial GSWs range from 20% to 60%.2,7,11,16,17,19,22 of patients, which limits the strength of our findings and
The mortality rate of our cohort fell within this range conclusions.
(47.9%) and was lower than the mortality reported by Bandt
and colleagues (65%).2 Unfortunately, those authors did not
provide a breakdown of the proportion of patients under- Conclusions
going surgery. In our cohort, 54.9% of patients underwent In Memphis and other large metropolitan communities,
surgical intervention. Of the survivors, 81% showed only pediatric intracranial GSWs are an unfortunate reality.
minor disability or better at the last follow-up (GOS Score In this study, 52% of children with an intracranial GSW
4 or 5). This rate is comparable with the results from the St. survived with aggressive surgical and medical care, and
Louis study in which 88% of survivors had a GOS score 81% of survivors had a favorable outcome (GOS Score 4
of 4 or 5.2 or 5) at the last follow-up. The utility of several clinical,
laboratory, and radiological prognostic factors were veri-
St. Louis Scale for Pediatric Gunshot Wounds to the Head fied. None of these factors, with the exception of bilateral
A number of prognostic scales have been proposed to fixed and dilated pupils, should be used alone to determine
help in determining the viability of patients with cranial prognosis and treatment, but instead all factors should be
GSWs.8,9,18,28,30 The St. Louis scale is the only one that considered together as they have greater predictive power
we know of that is specific for children and marks a sig- collectively. When used in our population as a predictive
nificant contribution to the literature.2 In Bandt and col- tool, the St. Louis Scale for Pediatric Gunshot Wounds to
leagues’ series, a St. Louis scale score ≤ 4 was associated the Head was superior at forecasting survival after a gun-
with a positive predictive value of 88.9% for survival; a shot injury rather than death.
score ≥ 5 was associated with a negative predictive value
of 96.7% for death. The sensitivity of the scale, using the Acknowledgments
St. Louis cohort, was 93.55% and the specificity of the We thank Andrew J. Gienapp for technical and copyediting
scale was 94.12%. preparation of the manuscript and figures and for publication assis-
The mean St. Louis score for the nonsurvivors in our tance with this manuscript.
cohort was 10, which is in general agreement with the
utility of the scale. However, the mean St. Louis score for
the group with a GOS score of 3 was 8.5, which demon- References
strates that some patients with a St. Louis score ≥ 5 can 1. Aarabi B, Tofighi B, Kufera JA, Hadley J, Ahn ES, Cooper C,
and will survive. In fact, 9 survivors had St. Louis scores et al: Predictors of outcome in civilian gunshot wounds to the
head. J Neurosurg 120:1138–1146, 2014
≥ 5. Of these 9 patients, 3 had a GOS score of 4 at the 2. Bandt SK, Greenberg JK, Yarbrough CK, Schechtman KB,
last follow-up and 5 had a GOS score of 3. While severe Limbrick DD, Leonard JR: Management of pediatric intra-
disability may be considered an unfavorable outcome by cranial gunshot wounds: predictors of favorable clinical out-
some (and probably more so for an adult patient), many come and a new proposed treatment paradigm. J Neurosurg
families would disagree with this sentiment when faced Pediatr 10:511–517, 2012
with the imminent death of their child. Upon further in- 3. Beaver BL, Moore VL, Peclet M, Haller JA Jr, Smialek J,
vestigation into this subgroup of the cohort, the higher St. Hill JL: Characteristics of pediatric firearm fatalities. J Pedi-
Louis scores were primarily attributable to deep nuclear atr Surg 25:97–100, 1990
injury and bihemispheric injury without transventricular 4. Cavaliere R, Cavenago L, Siccardi D, Viale GL: Gunshot
wounds of the brain in civilians. Acta Neurochir (Wien)
trajectory. Additional points were gained from low SBP 94:133–136, 1988
and midline shift. As such, some survivors with the poten- 5. Clark WC, Muhlbauer MS, Watridge CB, Ray MW: Analysis
tial for a favorable outcome may be missed if judged by of 76 civilian craniocerebral gunshot wounds. J Neurosurg
the St. Louis scale score alone. 65:9–14, 1986
Using our patient population, we determined that the St. 6. Coronado VG, Xu L, Basavaraju SV, McGuire LC, Wald
Louis scale was sensitive (94.12%), but lacked specificity MM, Faul MD, et al: Surveillance for traumatic brain injury-
for death as an outcome (75.68%). A score ≥ 5 was associ- related deaths—United States, 1997-2007. MMWR Surveill
ated with a positive predictive value of 78.05% for death; Summ 60:1–32, 2011
7. Coughlan MD, Fieggen AG, Semple PL, Peter JC: Cranio-
a score ≤ 4 was associated with a negative predictive value cerebral gunshot injuries in children. Childs Nerv Syst
of 93.33% for death (in other words 93.33% predictive for 19:348–352, 2003
survival). Therefore, we conclude that the St. Louis scale is 8. Grahm TW, Williams FC Jr, Harrington T, Spetzler RF: Ci-
more useful for determining those who will survive (score vilian gunshot wounds to the head: a prospective study. Neu-
≤ 4) rather than those who will die (score ≥ 5). Unfortu- rosurgery 27:696–700, 1990
9. Gressot LV, Chamoun RB, Patel AJ, Valadka AB, Suki D, 23. Petridis AK, Doukas A, Barth H, Mehdorn M: Outcome of
Robertson CS, et al: Predictors of outcome in civilians with craniocerebral gunshot injuries in the civilian population.
gunshot wounds to the head upon presentation. J Neurosurg Prognostic factors and treatment options. Cent Eur Neuro-
121:645–652, 2014 surg 72:5–14, 2011
10. Hofbauer M, Kdolsky R, Figl M, Grünauer J, Aldrian S, Os- 24. Prasad MR, Ewing-Cobbs L, Swank PR, Kramer L: Predic-
termann RC, et al: Predictive factors influencing the outcome tors of outcome following traumatic brain injury in young
after gunshot injuries to the head—a retrospective cohort children. Pediatr Neurosurg 36:64–74, 2002
study. J Trauma 69:770–775, 2010 25. Selden BS, Goodman JM, Cordell W, Rodman GH Jr,
11. Irfan FB, Hassan RU, Kumar R, Bhutta ZA, Bari E: Cranio- Schnitzer PG: Outcome of self-inflicted gunshot wounds of
cerebral gunshot injuries in preschoolers. Childs Nerv Syst the brain. Ann Emerg Med 17:247–253, 1988
26:61–66, 2010 26. Shaffrey ME, Polin RS, Phillips CD, Germanson T, Shaffrey
12. Joseph B, Aziz H, Pandit V, Kulvatunyou N, O’Keeffe T, CI, Jane JA: Classification of civilian craniocerebral gunshot
Wynne J, et al: Improving survival rates after civilian gun- wounds: a multivariate analysis predictive of mortality. J
shot wounds to the brain. J Am Coll Surg 218:58–65, 2014 Neurotrauma 9 (Suppl 1):S279–S285, 1992
13. Kaufman HH: Civilian gunshot wounds to the head. Neuro- 27. Siccardi D, Cavaliere R, Pau A, Lubinu F, Turtas S, Viale
surgery 32:962–964, 1993 GL: Penetrating craniocerebral missile injuries in civilians: a
14. Kim KA, Wang MY, McNatt SA, Pinsky G, Liu CY, Gian- retrospective analysis of 314 cases. Surg Neurol 35:455–460,
notta SL, et al: Vector analysis correlating bullet trajectory to 1991
outcome after civilian through-and-through gunshot wound 28. Stone JL, Lichtor T, Fitzgerald LF: Gunshot wounds to the
to the head: using imaging cues to predict fatal outcome. head in civilian practice. Neurosurgery 37:1104–1112, 1995
Neurosurgery 57:737–747, 2005 29. Pruitt BA Jr (ed): Surgical management of penetrating brain
15. Krieger MD, Levy ML, Apuzzo ML: Gunshot wounds to the injury. J Trauma 51 (2 Suppl):S16–S25, 2001
head in an urban setting. Neurosurg Clin N Am 6:605–610, 30. Turina D, Sustić A, Tićac Z, Dirlić A, Krstulović B, Glavas
1995 A, et al: War head injury score: an outcome prediction model
16. Levy ML: Outcome prediction following penetrating cranio- in War casualties with acute penetrating head injury. Mil
cerebral injury in a civilian population: aggressive surgical Med 166:331–334, 2001
management in patients with admission Glasgow Coma Scale 31. Zafonte RD, Wood DL, Harrison-Felix CL, Valena NV,
scores of 6 to 15. Neurosurg Focus 8(1):e2, 2000 Black K: Penetrating head injury: a prospective study of out-
17. Levy ML, Masri LS, Levy KM, Johnson FL, Martin-Thom- comes. Neurol Res 23:219–226, 2001
son E, Couldwell WT, et al: Penetrating craniocerebral injury
resultant from gunshot wounds: gang-related injury in chil-
dren and adolescents. Neurosurgery 33:1018–1025, 1993
18. Martins RS, Siqueira MG, Santos MT, Zanon-Collange N, Disclosures
Moraes OJ: Prognostic factors and treatment of penetrating
The authors report no conflict of interest concerning the materi-
gunshot wounds to the head. Surg Neurol 60:98–104, 2003
als or methods used in this study or the findings specified in this
19. Miner ME, Ewing-Cobbs L, Kopaniky DR, Cabrera J,
paper.
Kaufmann P: The results of treatment of gunshot wounds to
the brain in children. Neurosurgery 26:20–25, 1990
20. Murano T, Mohr AM, Lavery RF, Lynch C, Homnick AT, Author Contributions
Livingston DH: Civilian craniocerebral gunshot wounds: Conception and design: all authors. Acquisition of data: DeCuy-
an update in predicting outcomes. Am Surg 71:1009–1014, pere. Analysis and interpretation of data: Klimo, DeCuypere.
2005 Drafting the article: Klimo, DeCuypere. Critically revising the
21. Nakagawa TA, Ashwal S, Mathur M, Mysore M: Clinical article: all authors. Reviewed submitted version of manuscript: all
report—Guidelines for the determination of brain death in authors. Approved the final version of the manuscript on behalf
infants and children: an update of the 1987 task force recom- of all authors: Klimo. Study supervision: Klimo.
mendations. Pediatrics 128:e720–e740, 2011
22. Paret G, Barzilai A, Lahat E, Feldman Z, Ohad G, Vardi Correspondence
A, et al: Gunshot wounds in brains of children: prognostic Paul Klimo Jr., Semmes-Murphey Neurologic & Spine Institute,
variables in mortality, course, and outcome. J Neurotrauma 6325 Humphreys Blvd., Memphis, TN 38120. email: pklimo@
15:967–972, 1998 semmes-murphey.com.