ProCite
RefWorks
Reference Manager
BibTeX
Zotero
EndNote
-
1.
Daniel BD , Grace GA , Natrajan M , 2019. Tuberculous meningitis in children: clinical management & outcome. Indian J Med Res 150: 117–130.
-
2.
Panda PK , Panda P , Dawman L , Sihag RK , Sharawat IK , 2021. Efficacy and safety of thalidomide in patients with complicated central nervous system tuberculosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Trop Med Hyg 105: 1024–1030.
-
3.
Panda PK , Ramachandran A , Sharawat IK , Sherwani P , Bhat NK , 2022. Comparison of seizure characteristics and recurrence rates in children with viable parenchymal neurocysticercosis and tuberculoma in India. Am J Trop Med Hyg, doi: 10/4269/ajtmh.21-1298.
-
4.
Delage G , Dusseault M , 1979. Tuberculous meningitis in children: a retrospective study of 79 patients, with an analysis of prognostic factors. Can Med Assoc J 120: 305–309.
-
5.
Rohlwink UK et al., 2019. Tuberculous meningitis in children is characterized by compartmentalized immune responses and neural excitotoxicity. Nat Commun 10: 3767.
-
6.
Waecker NJ , 2002. Tuberculous meningitis in children. Curr Treat Options Neurol 4: 249–257.
-
7.
Sharma SK et al., 2017. Index-TB guidelines: guidelines on extrapulmonary tuberculosis for India. Indian J Med Res 145: 448–463.
-
8.
Schaaf HS , Seddon JA , 2021. Management of tuberculous meningitis in children. Paediatr Int Child Health 0: 1–6.
-
9.
Thao LTP et al., 2018. Prognostic models for 9-month mortality in tuberculous meningitis. Clin Infect Dis 66: 523–532.
-
10.
Rizvi I , Malhotra HS , Garg RK , Kumar N , 2020. Derivation of a bedside score (MASH-P) to predict 6-month mortality in tuberculous meningitis. J Neurol Sci 415: 116877.
-
11.
Mahadevan B , Mahadevan S , Serane VT , 2002. Prognostic factors in childhood tuberculous meningitis. J Trop Pediatr 48: 362–365.
-
12.
Karande S , Gupta V , Kulkarni M , Joshi A , 2005. Prognostic clinical variables in childhood tuberculous meningitis: an experience from Mumbai, India. Neurol India 53: 191–195.
-
13.
Marais S , Thwaites G , Schoeman JF , Török ME , Misra UK , Prasad K , Donald PR , Wilkinson RJ , Marais BJ , 2010. Tuberculous meningitis: a uniform case definition for use in clinical research. Lancet Infect Dis 10: 803–812.
-
14.
van Toorn R , Springer P , Laubscher JA , Schoeman JF , 2012. Value of different staging systems for predicting neurological outcome in childhood tuberculous meningitis. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis Off J Int Union Tuberc Lung Dis. 16: 628–632.
-
15.
Pollack MM et al., 2014. Relationship between the functional status scale and the pediatric overall performance category and pediatric cerebral performance category scales. JAMA Pediatr 168: 671–676.
-
16.
Baeza-Delgado C , Cerdá Alberich L , Carot-Sierra JM , Veiga-Canuto D , Martínez de las Heras B , Raza B , Martí-Bonmatí L , 2022. A practical solution to estimate the sample size required for clinical prediction models generated from observational research on data. Eur Radiol Exp 6: 22.
-
17.
Birenbaum D , Bancroft LW & Felsberg GJ. Imaging in acute stroke. 2011. West J Emerg Med. 212: 67–76.
-
18.
Fisher CM , 1995. Brain herniation: a revision of classical concepts. Can J Neurol Sci 22: 83–91.
-
19.
Sher K , Firdaus , Abbasi A , Bullo N , Kumar S , 2013. Stages of tuberculous meningitis: a clinicoradiologic analysis. J Coll Physicians Surg–Pak JCPSP 23: 405–408.
-
20.
Knaus WA , Draper EA , Wagner DP , Zimmerman JE , 1985. APACHE II: a severity of disease classification system. Crit Care Med 13: 818–829.
-
21.
Gemke RJ , van Vught J , 2002. Scoring systems in pediatric intensive care: PRISM III versus PIM. Intensive Care Med 28: 204–207.
-
22.
Rajshekhar V , 2009. Management of hydrocephalus in patients with tuberculous meningitis. Neurol India 57: 368–374.
-
23.
Faella FS , Pagliano P , Attanasio V , Rossi M , Rescigno C , Scarano F , Conte M , Fusco U , 2006. Factors influencing the presentation and outcome of tuberculous meningitis in childhood. Vivo Athens Greece 20: 187–191.
-
24.
Wang M-S , Zhao M , Liu X-J , 2021. Risk factors for poor outcome in childhood tuberculous meningitis. Sci Rep 11: 8654.
-
25.
Erdem H et al., 2015. Hamsi scoring in the prediction of unfavorable outcomes from tuberculous meningitis: results of Haydarpasa-II study. J Neurol 262: 890–898.
| Past two years | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 584 | 584 | 34 |
| Full Text Views | 34 | 34 | 4 |
| PDF Downloads | 48 | 48 | 4 |
Development and Validation of a Prognostic Model and Bedside Score for the Neurological Outcome in Children with Tuberculous Meningitis
ABSTRACT.
Only a few studies have explored prognostic factors for tuberculous meningitis (TBM) in children, and an easily applicable bedside prognostic score for TBM has not been developed yet. We compared the sociodemographic, clinical, radiological, and cerebrospinal fluid parameters in the cohort of 94 TBM cases aged 1 to 18 years, with at least 6 months of completed follow-up and determined the prognostic factors associated with poor functional outcome. We assessed our proposed prognostic model using both discrimination and calibration and subsequently used the bootstrap method to validate the model internally. We finally derived an easily applicable bedside prognostic score by rounding off the regression coefficients to the nearest integers. A total of 39 (41%) and 55 (59%) patients had poor and good functional outcomes, respectively, at the end of 6 months (12 died, 13%). In multivariate analysis, a high baseline Pediatric Cerebral Performance Category (PCPC) score, brain infarction in neuroimaging, tonic motor posturing, younger age, and stage III TBM were independent predictors of poor functional outcomes. The final model showed good discrimination (area under the curve = 88.2%, P < 0.001) and good calibration (Hosmer–Lemeshow test, P = 0.53). Bootstrapping also confirmed the internal validity of this model. The PITAS (PCPC score [P], brain infarction in neuroimaging [I], tonic motor posturing [T], age [A], and stage of TBM [S]) score developed from this model has a score ranging from 0 to 12, with a higher score predicting a higher risk of poor functional outcome. The PITAS score performed better than medical research council staging alone in predicting poor functional outcomes (area under the curve = 87.1% versus 82.3%). Our study’s PITAS score, developed and internally validated, has good sensitivity and specificity in predicting poor functional outcomes in pediatric TBM cases at 6 months.
Author Notes
Authors’ addresses: Indar Kumar Sharawat, Prateek Kumar Panda, Vinod Kumar, and Nowneet Kumar Bhat, Department of Pediatrics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences—Rishikesh, Rishikesh, India, E-mail: sharawatdrindar@gmail.com, drprateekpanda@gmail.com, vinodmbbs52@gmail.com, and drnmbhat@gmail.com. Aparna Ramachandran, Department of Neurology, IQRAA International Hospital and Research Centre, Kozhikode, Kerala, India, E-mail: aparna1234567@gmail.com. Poonam Sherwani, Radiodiagnosis and Imaging, All India Institute of Medical Sciences—Rishikesh, Rishikesh, India, E-mail: sherwanipoonam@gmail.com.