Abstract
BACKGROUND
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Given the pivotal role of proper triage and timely management in patients with TBI, physicians are seeking a readily informative, straightforward tool for evaluating patients in the emergency department.
AIM
To evaluate the association between on-admission pulse pressure (PP) and clinical outcomes, including severity of injury, complications, and mortality, among patients hospitalized with TBI.
METHODS
A retrospective observational study was conducted using data from adult patients with TBI admitted to the Hamad Trauma Center from 2011 to 2021. Patients were categorized into five PP groups at presentation in the emergency department: ≤ 30 mmHg, 31-40 mmHg, 41-50 mmHg, 51-60 mmHg, and > 60 mmHg.
RESULTS
A total of 5029 patients with TBI (mean age 33.1 ± 12.6 years; 87% male) were included. Low PP (PP ≤ 30) was significantly associated with younger age; higher injury severity; worse physiological parameters; and increased rates of transfusion, intubation, and acute respiratory distress syndrome (P < 0.001). Mortality was higher in the low-PP group (24%) compared with mid- and high-PP groups (5%-7%, P < 0.001). Bivariate analysis revealed that PP was positively correlated with age (r = 0.21), mean arterial pressure (r = 0.35), and Glasgow Coma Scale score (r = 0.098), and negatively correlated with shock index (r = -0.47), Injury Severity Score (r = -0.115), and blood units transfused (r = -0.18). Multivariable regression identified age, head Abbreviated Injury Scale score, PP, transfused blood units, and acute respiratory distress syndrome as independent predictors of mortality (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION
Admission PP reflects both hemodynamic stability and injury severity in patients with TBI. Low PP (≤ 30 mmHg) independently predicts higher mortality, whereas moderate PP (41-60 mmHg) is associated with optimal outcomes, suggesting this range represents a potential hemodynamic target. PP is a simple, rapid bedside adjunct marker that may aid early risk stratification and guide timely intervention in the management of TBI.
Keywords: Traumatic brain injury, Pulse pressure, Hemodynamics, Mortality, Prognostic marker
Core Tip: Traumatic brain injury is a major contributor to long-term disability. Hemodynamic parameters, including mean arterial pressure and pulse pressure (PP), play a critical role in maintaining cerebral perfusion, regulating intracranial pressure, and mitigating secondary brain injury. Admission PP reflects both hemodynamic stability and injury severity in patients with brain injury. Low PP (≤ 30 mmHg) independently predicts higher mortality, whereas moderate PP is associated with optimal outcomes, suggesting that this range represents a potential hemodynamic target. PP is a simple bedside adjunct marker that aids early risk stratification and guides timely intervention in patients with traumatic brain injury.
INTRODUCTION
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a major contributor to long-term disability and neurological impairment among trauma patients[1], with an estimated global incidence of approximately 55.5 million cases annually[2]. A systematic review from the Middle East and North Africa region reported a TBI mortality rate of 13%[3]. Numerous studies have consistently demonstrated that advanced age, preexisting comorbidities, and greater initial severity of injury are strongly associated with worse clinical prognoses in TBI[4-6]. Hemodynamic parameters, including systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and pulse pressure (PP), play a critical role in maintaining cerebral perfusion, regulating intracranial pressure (ICP), and mitigating secondary brain injury. Guidelines for severe TBI emphasize the importance of maintaining adequate blood pressure to improve outcomes[7].
The prognostic value of PP, defined as the difference between SBP and DBP, remains inadequately characterized in the context of TBI. In the context of isolated systolic hypertension, increases in PP are significantly amplified, reaching levels that can disrupt cerebral blood flow autoregulation and increase the risk of stroke and mortality[8,9]. Excessively high PP may compromise the integrity of cerebral microvasculature by exceeding the upper limit of autoregulatory capacity, potentially leading to ischemic injury. In non-demented individuals, the presence of cerebral microhemorrhages (capillary microbleeds) has been associated with older age, hypertension, and cognitive decline[10].
An elevated PP has been identified as a key predictor of increased stroke risk and recurrence and is independently associated with adverse cerebrovascular outcomes. However, its relationship with incident stroke is partly mediated by SBP[11-13]. A narrow PP has been independently associated with the need for massive transfusion and urgent surgical intervention in hemodynamically stable trauma patients[14]. At the same time, deviations in PP may reflect impaired cerebral perfusion, ongoing hemorrhage, or disrupted autoregulatory functions. Narrow PP has also been associated with major surgical interventions in normotensive trauma patients[15]. Notably, PP tends to increase with age and may serve as a useful hemodynamic indicator in older individuals[16-18]. Although numerous studies[14,15,19] have explored PP in the context of spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage[11,12,16,19], its clinical significance in TBI remains unclear. Moreover, the prognostic value of PP as a marker for outcome prediction or risk stratification in TBI has not been well addressed in clinical trials. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the association between on-admission PP and clinical outcomes, including injury severity, complications, and mortality, among patients hospitalized with TBI.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A retrospective analysis was conducted using data from the Qatar National Trauma Registry to identify patients admitted to the Hamad Trauma Center with a diagnosis of TBI. TBI cases were defined according to the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, and the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS). The Hamad Trauma Center is the only level 1 trauma care facility in Qatar, providing comprehensive care for patients with moderate to severe injuries. The study included all adult patients aged 14 years or older who were admitted with TBI from January 2011 to April 2021. Pediatric population (< 14 years), those declared dead on arrival, those who died within 24 hours of admission, inter-facility transfers, and patients with incomplete or missing relevant data were excluded.
Collected variables included demographic and clinical characteristics such as age; sex; mechanism of injury; vital signs at the scene and upon hospital admission (SBP, DBP, PP, MAP); shock index in the emergency department (ED); ethanol levels; associated injuries (chest, abdomen, pelvis, lower and upper extremities, acute kidney injury); AIS for the head, chest, abdomen, and pelvis; Injury Severity Score (ISS); Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score at the scene and in the ED; intubation; exploratory laparotomy; craniotomy/craniectomy; need for blood transfusion; massive transfusion protocol activation; hospital and intensive care unit length of stay; ventilator days; acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); and in-hospital mortality. The shock index was defined as the initial heart rate divided by the initial SBP. Patients were stratified into five groups based on their initial PP at presentation: Group 1 (PP ≤ 30 mmHg), group 2 (PP: 31-40 mmHg), group 3 (PP: 41-50 mmHg), group 4 (PP: 51-60 mmHg), and group 5 (PP > 60 mmHg), consistent with previously published classifications[20]. The Institutional Review Board (MRC-01-21-990) of Hamad Medical Corporation approved this retrospective observational study and granted a waiver of informed consent.
Statistical analysis
Data were expressed as proportions, means ± standard deviation (SD), 95% confidence intervals (CI), or medians with ranges, as appropriate. Normality of PP was assessed using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test (Figure 1). Comparisons among groups were performed using the χ2 test for categorical variables and the one-way analysis of variance for continuous variables, as appropriate. Yates’ corrected χ2 was used for categorical variables if the expected cell frequencies were less than 5. Pearson’s correlation analysis was used to assess the relationship between PP and selected continuous variables, including age, shock index in the ED, MAP in the ED, ISS, GCS score in the ED, and the number of blood units transfused. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of mortality in patients with TBI, adjusting for age, sex, head AIS, PP, blood units transfused, and the presence of ARDS. Results were expressed as adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with corresponding 95%CIs. A two-tailed P value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 26 (IBM, Armonk, NY, United States).
Figure 1.
Normality test for pulse pressure using a histogram and normal Q-Q plot.
RESULTS
A total of 5029 patients were included in the analysis and stratified into five groups based on their initial PP. Table 1 summarizes and compares the demographic characteristics and injury profiles of patients with TBI across these five PP categories. Age demonstrated a progressive increase with rising PP, from a mean age of approximately 29 years in patients with PP ≤ 30 mmHg to 36.5 years in those with PP > 60 mmHg (P = 0.001). Although male predominance was consistent across all groups, it did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.05). Traffic-related injuries were most frequent in both the lowest and highest PP groups. In contrast, falls were more common with mid-range PP values (P = 0.001), suggesting that lower PP may be associated with higher-energy trauma mechanisms.
Table 1.
Clinical characteristics, management, and outcome in traumatic brain injury based on pulse pressure (n = 5029), n (%)/mean ± SD
|
|
PP ≤ 30 mmHg
|
PP: 31-40 mmHg
|
PP: 41-50 mmHg
|
PP: 51-60 mmHg
|
PP > 60 mmHg
|
P value |
| Number (n = 4963) | 578 (11.5) | 1010 (20.1) | 1409 (28.0) | 1102 (21.9) | 930 (18.5) | |
| Age (yr) | 28.7 ± 16.2 | 28.4 ± 14.7 | 29.1 ± 15.0 | 31.2 ± 15.3 | 36.5 ± 19.6 | 0.001 |
| Males | 517 (89.4) | 910 (90.1) | 1276 (90.6) | 1023 (92.8) | 857 (92.2) | 0.05 for all |
| Females | 61 (10.6) | 100 (9.9) | 133 (9.4) | 79 (7.2) | 73 (7.8) | |
| Mechanism of injury | ||||||
| Traffic-related | 238 (41.2) | 359 (35.5) | 499 (35.4) | 387 (35.1) | 376 (40.4) | 0.001 for all |
| Pedestrians | 114 (19.7) | 155 (15.3) | 195 (13.8) | 144 (13.1) | 121 (13.0) | |
| Fall from height | 166 (28.7) | 348 (34.5) | 523 (37.1) | 419 (38.0) | 317 (34.1) | |
| Fall of a heavy object | 14 (2.4) | 52 (5.1) | 71 (5.0) | 66 (6.0) | 46 (4.9) | |
| Others | 46 (8.0) | 96 (9.5) | 121 (8.6) | 86 (7.8) | 70 (7.5) | |
| Vitals at scene | ||||||
| Pulse (n = 3718) | 101.2 ± 27.0 | 94.9 ± 24.2 | 93.4 ± 23.4 | 89.1 ± 20.8 | 90.4 ± 21.8 | 0.001 |
| SBP (n = 3618) | 126.0 ± 27.6 | 129.9 ± 23.3 | 130.3 ± 21.9 | 135.4 ± 20.9 | 143.9 ± 27.7 | 0.001 |
| DBP (n = 3606) | 82.2 ± 22.2 | 81.1 ± 20.6 | 81.8 ± 16.8 | 83.6 ± 17.6 | 86.2 ± 18.6 | 0.001 |
| GCS (mean, 95%CI) (n = 3794) | 10.0 (9.6-10.5) | 11.4 (11.1-11.7) | 12.4 (12.1-12.6) | 12.7 (12.4-12.9) | 12.3 (11.9-12.6) | 0.001 |
| Vital signs at hospital admission (ED) | ||||||
| Pulse | 107.1 ± 26.8 | 97.5 ± 24.5 | 93.5 ± 22.3 | 90.2 ± 20.6 | 91.2 ± 22.1 | 0.001 |
| SBP | 100.7 ± 22.6 | 113.7 ± 15.8 | 123.2 ± 14.7 | 133.1 ± 14.2 | 151.2 ± 22.3 | 0.001 |
| DBP | 76.2 ± 22.2 | 76.3 ± 15.8 | 76.5 ± 14.3 | 77.0 ± 13.6 | 77.0 ± 16.9 | 0.733 |
| GCS (mean, 95%CI) (n = 4931) |
8.4 (7.8-8.9) | 10.3 (9.9-10.7) | 11.3 (11.0-11.6) | 11.9 (11.5-12.2) | 11.3 (10.9-11.7) | 0.001 |
| Shock index in the ED | 1.15 ± 0.49 | 0.88 ± 0.29 | 0.77 ± 0.22 | 0.69 ± 0.18 | 0.62 ± 0.18 | 0.001 |
| Ethanol levels | 41.4 ± 21.9 | 41.5 ± 22.2 | 43.2 ± 19.7 | 40.0 ± 24.9 | 39.0 ± 23.7 | 0.79 |
| Ethanol positive | 55 (9.5) | 110 (10.9) | 124 (8.8) | 77 (7.0) | 51 (5.5) | 0.001 |
| MAP in the ED | 84.4 ± 22.2 | 88.8 ± 15.8 | 92.1 ± 14.3 | 95.7 ± 13.7 | 101.7 ± 17.9 | 0.001 |
| Associated injuries | ||||||
| Chest | 282 (48.8) | 343 (34.0) | 389 (27.6) | 264 (24.0) | 265 (28.5) | 0.001 |
| Abdomen | 167 (28.9) | 193 (19.1) | 166 (11.8) | 102 (9.3) | 55 (5.9) | 0.001 |
| Pelvis | 110 (19.0) | 122 (12.1) | 113 (8.0) | 74 (6.7) | 57 (6.1) | 0.001 |
| Lower extremity | 121 (20.9) | 158 (15.6) | 170 (12.1) | 125 (11.3) | 93 (10.0) | 0.001 |
| Upper extremity | 182 (31.5) | 221 (21.9) | 298 (21.1) | 200 (18.1) | 207 (22.3) | 0.001 |
| Acute kidney injury | 25 (4.3) | 21 (2.1) | 15 (1.1) | 9 (0.8) | 15 (1.6) | 0.001 |
| Head AIS score | 3.6 ± 1.0 | 3.4 ± 0.9 | 3.3 ± 0.9 | 3.3 ± 0.9 | 3.4 ± 0.9 | 0.001 |
| Chest AIS score | 2.8 ± 0.7 | 2.7 ± 0.7 | 2.7 ± 0.6 | 2.6 ± 0.7 | 2.5 ± 0.7 | 0.001 |
| Abdomen AIS score | 2.7 ± 0.9 | 2.5 ± 0.9 | 2.4 ± 0.8 | 2.3 ± 0.8 | 2.3 ± 0.9 | 0.001 |
| Pelvis AIS score | 2.3 ± 0.8 | 2.2 ± 0.6 | 2.1 ± 0.4 | 2.1 ± 0.3 | 2.1 ± 0.3 | 0.004 |
| MAP = SBP + 2 (DBP)/3, PP = SBP-DBP; SI = HR/SBP | ||||||
PP: Pulse pressure; SBP: Systolic blood pressure; DBP: Diastolic blood pressure; GCS: Glasgow Coma Scale; CI: Confidence intervals; ED: Emergency department; MAP: Mean arterial pressure; AIS: Abbreviated Injury Scale; SI: Shock index; HR: Heart rate.
Vital signs at the scene and upon hospital admission showed distinct patterns. Patients with PP ≤ 30 mmHg had significantly worse physiological and neurological parameters both prehospital and at admission (P = 0.001 for all), except for DBP in the ED. Additionally, the PP ≤ 30 mmHg group had significantly elevated shock index in the ED (P = 0.001) and the lowest MAP at ED presentation (P = 0.001). Furthermore, patients in the PP ≤ 30 mmHg group showed a significantly higher rate of associated injuries to the chest, abdomen, pelvis, and extremities (P = 0.001 for all). The AIS analysis revealed that head AIS was highest in the lowest PP group (mean 3.6), consistent with more severe neurological injury. Similarly, AIS scores for other regions were also highest in the PP ≤ 30 mmHg group, further indicating greater overall injury severity among patients with lower PP. Figure 2 shows no significant difference between sexes across PP categories.
Figure 2.
Distribution of pulse pressure categories stratified by sex. PP: Pulse pressure.
Outcomes
Table 2 presents the management, complications, and outcomes of patients with TBI stratified by PP groups. The mean ISS was highest among patients in the PP ≤ 30 mmHg group (P = 0.001). The need for intubation (P = 0.001), exploratory laparotomy (P = 0.001), blood transfusion (P = 0.001), and massive transfusion protocol activation was also significantly more frequent in this group. Moreover, the incidence of ARDS was also highest among patients with PP ≤ 30 mmHg compared with other groups (P = 0.001). Also, patients in the lowest PP group experienced prolonged intensive care unit and hospital stays. The rate of in-hospital mortality (Figure 2) was significantly higher in the PP ≤ 30 mmHg group (24%) compared with other PP groups (P = 0.001). Figure 3 illustrates in-hospital mortality across the five PP groups, highlighting that mortality was highest in the lowest PP group (≤ 30 mmHg) and lowest in the 41-60 mmHg range.
Table 2.
Management, complications, and outcome of traumatic brain injury patients across pulse pressure groups, n (%)/mean, 95% confidence intervals
|
|
PP ≤ 30 mmHg
|
PP: 31-40 mmHg
|
PP: 41-50 mmHg
|
PP: 51-60 mmHg
|
PP > 60 mmHg
|
P value
|
| Number | 578 (11.5) | 1010 (20.1) | 1409 (28.0) | 1102 (21.9) | 930 (18.5) | |
| Injury Severity Score (n = 5016), mean ± SD | 24.7 ± 12.0 | 19.7 ± 10.9 | 18.1 ± 10.0 | 17.5 ± 9.0 | 18.3 ± 9.2 | 0.001 |
| Intubation | 358 (61.9) | 414 (41.0) | 461 (32.7) | 337 (30.6) | 355 (38.2) | 0.001 |
| Exploratory laparotomy | 60 (10.4) | 54 (5.3) | 35 (2.5) | 20 (1.8) | 7 (0.8) | 0.001 |
| Craniotomy/craniectomy | 63 (10.9) | 92 (9.1) | 153 (10.9) | 110 (10.0) | 116 (12.5) | 0.17 |
| Blood transfusion | 303 (52.4) | 287 (28.4) | 292 (20.7) | 173 (15.7) | 175 (18.8) | 0.001 |
| Blood units transfused | 6 (1-79) | 4 (1-49) | 3 (1-62) | 3 (1-20) | 4 (1-51) | 0.001 |
| Massive transfusion protocol activation | 117 (20.2) | 73 (7.2) | 43 (3.1) | 17 (1.5) | 17 (1.8) | 0.001 |
| ARDS | 21 (3.6) | 11 (1.1) | 13 (0.9) | 11 (1.0) | 11 (1.2) | 0.001 |
| Intensive care unit length of stay | 7 (1-115) | 5 (1-155) | 5 (1-161) | 5 (1-70) | 5 (1-126) | 0.001 |
| Ventilator days | 6 (1-115) | 6 (1-180) | 5 (1-55) | 5 (1-84) | 6 (1-100) | 0.15 |
| Hospital length of stay (days; n = 5010) | 10 (1-304) | 7 (1-360) | 6 (1-217) | 6 (1-218) | 8 (1-186) | 0.001 |
| In-hospital mortality | 139 (24.0) | 96 (9.5) | 77 (5.5) | 65 (5.9) | 67 (7.2) | 0.001 |
PP: Pulse pressure; ARDS: Acute respiratory distress syndrome.
Figure 3.
In-hospital mortality across the five pulse pressure (PP) groups. Mortality was highest in the lowest PP group (≤ 30 mmHg) and lowest in the moderate PP range (41-60 mmHg). PP: Pulse pressure.
Correlation coefficient
Table 3 illustrates the bivariate correlations between PP and other clinical variables. Significant positive correlations were identified between PP and age (r = 0.21), MAP (r = 0.35), and GCS score in the ED (r = 0.098). In contrast, PP showed significant negative correlations with shock index in the ED (r = -0.47), ISS (r = -0.115), and the number of transfused blood units (r = -0.18).
Table 3.
Bivariate correlation between pulse pressure and other relevant factors
|
Variables
|
Pearson correlation
|
P value
|
| Age | 0.210 | 0.001 |
| Shock index in the ED | -0.474 | 0.001 |
| MAP in the ED | 0.346 | 0.001 |
| Injury Severity Score | -0.115 | 0.001 |
| Glasgow Coma Scale score | 0.098 | 0.001 |
| Blood transfusion units | -0.184 | 0.001 |
ED: Emergency department; MAP: Mean arterial pressure.
Predictors of mortality
Table 4 summarizes the results of the multivariable logistic regression analysis for predictors of mortality. After adjusting for potential confounders, significant independent predictors included age (aOR: 1.022; 95%CI: 1.012-1.032, P = 0.001), head AIS score (aOR: 2.757; 95%CI 2.307-3.295; P = 0.001), PP in the ED (aOR: 0.986; 95%CI: 0.978-0.994; P = 0.001), blood units transfused (aOR: 1.061; 95%CI: 1.037-1.084; P = 0.001) and ARDS (aOR: 2.781; 95%CI: 1.533-5.044; P = 0.001).
Table 4.
Multivariable logistic regression analysis of predictors of mortality
|
Variable
|
Adjusted odd ratio
|
95% confidence interval
|
P value
|
| Age | 1.022 | 1.012-1.032 | 0.001 |
| Sex (male) | 1.364 | 0.796-2.337 | 0.259 |
| Head AIS1 | 2.757 | 2.307-3.295 | 0.001 |
| Pulse pressure at TRU1 | 0.986 | 0.978-0.994 | 0.001 |
| Blood transfusion units | 1.061 | 1.037-1.084 | 0.001 |
| ARDS | 2.781 | 1.533-5.044 | 0.001 |
Continuous variable.
AIS: Abbreviated Injury Scale; TRU: Triage and reception unit; ARDS: Acute respiratory distress syndrome.
DISCUSSION
This retrospective study of 5029 patients with TBI demonstrated that lower admission PP (≤ 30 mmHg) was significantly associated with younger age, higher injury severity, greater hemodynamic instability, and increased mortality compared with patients with moderate or higher PP values. Conversely, patients with moderate PP (41-60 mmHg) exhibited the most favorable physiological parameters, neurological status, and survival outcomes, suggesting that this range represents an optimal hemodynamic window for patients with TBI. In contrast, high PP (> 60 mmHg) was observed predominantly among older individuals and was associated with a slightly increased mortality rate. Multivariable analysis further identified PP as an independent predictor of mortality alongside age, head injury severity, bleeding, and ARDS. These findings suggest the role of PP as an integrative hemodynamic marker reflecting both cardiovascular function and trauma severity. Prior studies have demonstrated that significant fluctuations in SBP are strongly associated with worse outcomes in traumatic intraparenchymal hemorrhage[21].
Hemodynamic indices are fundamental to maintaining cerebral perfusion, regulating ICP, and preventing secondary brain injury[7]. The prognostic relevance of PP remains insufficiently characterized by TBI. Markedly elevated PP, particularly in isolated systolic hypertension, can impair cerebral blood flow autoregulation and increase the risk of stroke and mortality[8,9], potentially causing microvascular injury when autoregulatory limits are exceeded. High PP is an established predictor of stroke risk and recurrence, with associations partly mediated by SBP[11-13]. Conversely, low PP has been independently linked to massive transfusion and urgent surgical intervention in trauma patients, even in the absence of hypotension[14,15]. Deviations in PP may therefore indicate impaired perfusion, active hemorrhage, or disrupted autoregulation. Although PP generally increases with age and may serve as a useful hemodynamic marker in older adults[16-18], its clinical significance in TBI remains inadequately defined despite investigations in trauma and spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage cohorts[11,12,14-16,19,22].
Prognostic relevance of PP
Fluctuations in blood pressure may impair cerebral autoregulation, which may lead to cerebral edema and hematoma expansion. Similarly, ICP waveform parameters, including mean amplitude and pulse shape index, correlate with mortality, even in patients with relatively normal ICP values[22]. These observations suggest that both absolute PP and its variability reflect the degree of cerebrovascular stress and may predict adverse outcomes following TBI. The physiological mechanisms underlying this relationship are multifactorial. The Cushing reflex, characterized by widened PP, hypertension, bradycardia, and irregular respiration, is a classic sign of elevated ICP and reduced cerebral perfusion pressure[23]. Moreover, paroxysmal sympathetic hyperactivity following TBI can produce transient surges in PP (> 80 mmHg) that are associated with poor neurological outcomes[24]. Conversely, low PP may signal hypovolemia, impaired cardiac output, or loss of vascular tone, leading to inadequate cerebral perfusion and secondary ischemic injury[25]. Despite these observations, a notable gap remains in the literature regarding the role of PP variability in TBI.
In our study, patients with higher PP tended to be relatively older, which may reflect underlying vascular stiffness or age-related comorbidities. Specifically, the mean age in the PP > 60 mmHg group was significantly higher compared to that in the PP ≤ 30 mmHg group. This trend aligns with established physiology, as PP generally increases with advancing age and may serve as an indicator of arterial compliance and vascular health in older individuals[26]. These findings suggest that elevated PP in older patients is likely to reflect chronic vascular remodeling rather than acute hemodynamic disturbance.
In our study, traffic-related injuries predominated in both the lowest and highest PP groups. In contrast, falls were more frequent among patients with mid-range PP values, indicating that lower PP may be linked to high-energy trauma mechanisms and greater injury severity. One possible explanation is that high-impact mechanisms, such as motor vehicle collisions, often lead to significant blood loss, hypovolemia, and impaired cardiac output, resulting in reduced PP due to decreased stroke volume and vascular tone[27]. Conversely, elevated PP observed in some traffic-related cases may reflect a stress-induced catecholamine surge and transient sympathetic overactivation following severe trauma[28]. In contrast, low-energy mechanisms such as falls typically produce moderate physiological responses with relatively preserved hemodynamic stability, corresponding to mid-range PP values[29]. These findings underscore the complex interaction between trauma mechanism, physiological compensation, and vascular response following TBI[30].
In our study, patients with PP ≤ 30 mmHg exhibited markedly greater hemodynamic instability and neurological status, reflected by lower GCS scores and higher shock index values. This observation likely reflects hypovolemia, reduced cardiac output, and impaired cerebral perfusion secondary to severe hemorrhage or systemic shock[31]. In TBI, such hemodynamic compromise can exacerbate secondary brain injury by impairing cerebral blood flow and oxygen delivery, leading to ischemia and worsening neurological outcomes[32]. Prior studies have shown that shock and hypotension at presentation are strong predictors of mortality and poor neurological recovery in patients with TBI[33,34]. These findings suggest that a low PP with concurrent elevated shock index and reduced GCS score represents a state of compromised perfusion and severe physiological stress.
Moreover, in our study, PP showed positive correlations of varying strengths with age, MAP, and GCS score, and negative correlations with shock index, ISS, and transfusion requirements, further supporting PP as a marker of hemodynamic stability. These relationships are consistent with prior studies linking low PP with hemorrhagic shock and high transfusion needs in trauma populations[35,36].
In our study, analysis of associated injuries revealed that chest and abdominal injuries were most prevalent among patients with low PP, with the incidence of these injuries progressively decreasing as PP increased. This pattern supports the notion that patients presenting with low PP are more likely to sustain severe multisystem trauma, reflecting greater overall injury burden, physiological compromise, and the need for emergent interventions[15,37].
In our cohort, the requirement for blood transfusion was highest among patients with low PP and progressively declined with increasing PP. This trend suggests that low PP is associated with higher transfusion demand, likely reflecting underlying hypovolemia and hemodynamic instability. Although most studies on TBI have focused on SBP thresholds (e.g., hypotension < 90 mmHg) as critical determinants of outcome, PP is increasingly recognized as an independent hemodynamic marker with prognostic significance. In a study of spontaneous subarachnoid hemorrhage, a U-shaped relationship between baseline PP and mortality was reported, with the lowest mortality observed at PP values between 57 and 68 mmHg, and higher mortality associated with both low (< 56 mmHg) and high (> 69 mmHg) PP levels[38]. Consistent with these observations, our study demonstrated a significantly higher in-hospital mortality rate among patients with PP ≤ 30 mmHg, and multivariable analysis confirmed PP as an independent predictor of mortality. This finding aligns with recent evidence indicating that PP is an independent predictor of in-hospital mortality[13,39]. Similar trends were observed in the INTERACT2 trial, where higher SBP variability during the early stages of hospitalization was significantly associated with a higher risk of death or severe disability in patients with acute intracerebral hemorrhage[40].
The precise mechanisms through which SBP and PP variability influence outcomes in TBI remain unclear. Excessive fluctuations in SBP or PP may disrupt this autoregulatory balance. In hemorrhagic stroke, such variability has been linked to increased cerebral edema and hematoma expansion[19]. A similar pathophysiological mechanism is believed to operate in TBI, wherein blood pressure fluctuations may impair baroreflex sensitivity and exacerbate secondary brain injury[21].
Taken together, these findings suggest that on-admission PP provides valuable prognostic information in TBI, capturing both vascular and systemic components of the injury response. While its predictive strength is modest compared with established indicators such as head AIS and ARDS, PP offers a simple, rapid, and noninvasive tool that can complement existing triage and monitoring strategies in patients with TBI.
Limitations
This study has several limitations that should be acknowledged. First, its retrospective observational design limits causal inference between PP and clinical outcomes. Second, all data were derived from a single national trauma center, which, despite being the only level I facility in the country, may limit the generalizability of findings to other populations or healthcare settings. Third, PP measurements were obtained only upon admission, without accounting for subsequent fluctuations or trends that may have occurred during hospitalization. Finally, preexisting comorbidities, medication use (e.g., antihypertensives or beta-blockers), and fluid resuscitation before arrival were not fully captured, which could have affected the accuracy of baseline PP measurements. Additionally, correlations between PP and other variables, although statistically significant, were modest and should be interpreted with caution.
CONCLUSION
Admission PP reflects both hemodynamic and injury severity in patients with TBI. Low PP was associated with younger age, greater injury burden, hemodynamic instability, higher transfusion requirements, and the highest mortality. Moderate PP was associated with favorable physiological stability, neurological status, and the lowest complication and mortality rates, suggesting that it may represent an optimal PP range for improved outcomes. Moreover, high PP was more frequent among older patients and was associated with mildly increased mortality, likely reflecting age-related vascular changes rather than acute hemodynamic derangement. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that PP was an independent predictor of mortality, alongside established risk factors. These findings underscore the potential value of PP as a simple, noninvasive bedside adjunct marker for early risk stratification and triage in TBI. Future prospective multicenter studies incorporating serial hemodynamic monitoring and comprehensive assessment of cardiovascular and neurological parameters are warranted to validate and expand upon these findings.
Footnotes
Institutional review board statement: This retrospective study was approved by the Medical Research Center Institutional Review Board (approval no: MRC-01-21-990).
Informed consent statement: Patients were not required to provide informed consent for this study because the analysis used anonymized clinical data obtained after each patient had provided written informed consent for treatment.
Conflict-of-interest statement: All the authors report no relevant conflicts of interest for this article.
Peer review: Externally peer reviewed.
Peer-review model: Single blind
Specialty type: Critical care medicine
Country of origin: Qatar
Peer-review report’s classification
Scientific quality: Grade B
Novelty: Grade D
Creativity or innovation: Grade C
Scientific significance: Grade C
P-Reviewer: Wu FL, PsyD, PhD, Associate Professor, Researcher, China S-Editor: Hu XY L-Editor: Filipodia P-Editor: Yu HG
Contributor Information
Khalid Ahmed, Department of Surgery, Trauma Surgery, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha 3050, Qatar.
Ayman El-Menyar, Department of Surgery, Trauma Surgery, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha 3050, Qatar; Department of Clinical Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, Doha 24144, Qatar. aymanco65@yahoo.com.
Mohammad Asim, Department of Surgery, Trauma Surgery, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha 3050, Qatar.
Hisham Al Jogol, Department of Surgery, Trauma Surgery, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha 3050, Qatar.
Ibrahim Taha, Department of Surgery, Trauma Surgery, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha 3050, Qatar.
Ahad Kanbar, Department of Surgery, Trauma Surgery, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha 3050, Qatar.
Basil Younis, Department of Surgery, Trauma Surgery, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha 3050, Qatar.
Sandro Rizoli, Department of Surgery, Trauma Surgery, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha 3050, Qatar.
Hassan Al-Thani, Department of Surgery, Trauma Surgery, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha 3050, Qatar.
Data sharing statement
All relevant data are presented in the manuscript, figures, and tables.
References
- 1.Orito K, Hirohata M, Nakamura Y, Yamamoto M, Takeshige N, Aoki T, Hattori G, Sakata K, Takeuchi Y, Uzu H, Takasu O, Abe T, Uchiyama Y, Morioka M. Predictive Value of Leakage Signs for Pure Brain Contusional Hematoma Expansion. J Neurotrauma. 2018;35:760–766. doi: 10.1089/neu.2017.5247. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Svedung Wettervik T, Howells T, Lewén A, Enblad P. Blood Pressure Variability and Optimal Cerebral Perfusion Pressure-New Therapeutic Targets in Traumatic Brain Injury. Neurosurgery. 2020;86:E300–E309. doi: 10.1093/neuros/nyz515. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Al-Hajj S, Hammoud Z, Colnaric J, Ataya M, Macaron MM, Kadi K, Harati H, Phipps H, Mondello S, Tamim H, Abou Abbass H, Kobeissy F TBI Working Group. Characterization of Traumatic Brain Injury Research in the Middle East and North Africa Region: A Systematic Review. Neuroepidemiology. 2021:1–12. doi: 10.1159/000511554. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Zarshenas S, Colantonio A, Alavinia SM, Jaglal S, Tam L, Cullen N. Predictors of Discharge Destination From Acute Care in Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2019;34:52–64. doi: 10.1097/HTR.0000000000000403. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Peck KA, Calvo RY, Sise CB, Johnson J, Yen JW, Sise MJ, Dunne CE, Badiee J, Shackford SR, Lobatz MA. Death after discharge: predictors of mortality in older brain-injured patients. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2014;77:978–983. doi: 10.1097/TA.0000000000000356. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Colantonio A, Escobar MD, Chipman M, McLellan B, Austin PC, Mirabella G, Ratcliff G. Predictors of postacute mortality following traumatic brain injury in a seriously injured population. J Trauma. 2008;64:876–882. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e31804d493e. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Carney N, Totten AM, O'Reilly C, Ullman JS, Hawryluk GW, Bell MJ, Bratton SL, Chesnut R, Harris OA, Kissoon N, Rubiano AM, Shutter L, Tasker RC, Vavilala MS, Wilberger J, Wright DW, Ghajar J. Guidelines for the Management of Severe Traumatic Brain Injury, Fourth Edition. Neurosurgery. 2017;80:6–15. doi: 10.1227/NEU.0000000000001432. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Prevention of stroke by antihypertensive drug treatment in older persons with isolated systolic hypertension. Final results of the Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program (SHEP). SHEP Cooperative Research Group. JAMA. 1991;265:3255–3264. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Saklayen MG, Deshpande NV. Timeline of History of Hypertension Treatment. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2016;3:3. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2016.00003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Graff-Radford J, Simino J, Kantarci K, Mosley TH Jr, Griswold ME, Windham BG, Sharrett AR, Albert MS, Gottesman RF, Jack CR Jr, Vemuri P, Knopman DS. Neuroimaging Correlates of Cerebral Microbleeds: The ARIC Study (Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities) Stroke. 2017;48:2964–2972. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.018336. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Ayyagari R, Vekeman F, Lefebvre P, Ong SH, Faust E, Trahey A, Machnicki G, Duh MS. Pulse pressure and stroke risk: development and validation of a new stroke risk model. Curr Med Res Opin. 2014;30:2453–2460. doi: 10.1185/03007995.2014.971357. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Tsivgoulis G, Spengos K, Zakopoulos N, Manios E, Xinos K, Vassilopoulos D, Vemmos KN. Twenty four hour pulse pressure predicts long term recurrence in acute stroke patients. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2005;76:1360–1365. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.2004.057265. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Huang YH, Lee TH, Ting CW. Exploring the relationship between admission pulse pressure and clinical features in patients with spontaneous supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhage. Neurosurg Rev. 2023;47:19. doi: 10.1007/s10143-023-02256-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Bankhead-Kendall B, Teixeira P, Roward S, Ali S, Ryder A, Sahi S, Cardenas T, Aydelotte J, Coopwood B, Brown C. Narrow pulse pressure is independently associated with massive transfusion and emergent surgery in hemodynamically stable trauma patients. Am J Surg. 2020;220:1319–1322. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2020.06.042. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Salman S, Laeeque O, Jawaid B, Khalid OB, Shahab H, Faheem K. Pulse Pressure: A Predictor of Intervention in Blunt Abdominal Trauma. Cureus. 2023;15:e41305. doi: 10.7759/cureus.41305. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Glasser SP, Halberg DL, Sands CD, Mosher A, Muntner PM, Howard G. Is Pulse Pressure an Independent Risk Factor for Incident Stroke, REasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke. Am J Hypertens. 2015;28:987–994. doi: 10.1093/ajh/hpu265. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Kalra A, Kang JK, Wilcox C, Shou BL, Brown P, Rycus P, Anders MM, Zaaqoq AM, Brodie D, Whitman GJR, Cho SM HERALD group. Pulse Pressure and Acute Brain Injury in Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: An Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Registry Analysis. ASAIO J. 2025;71:99–108. doi: 10.1097/MAT.0000000000002294. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Dart AM. Should pulse pressure influence prescribing? Aust Prescr. 2017;40:26–29. doi: 10.18773/austprescr.2017.006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Aries MJ, Elting JW, De Keyser J, Kremer BP, Vroomen PC. Cerebral autoregulation in stroke: a review of transcranial Doppler studies. Stroke. 2010;41:2697–2704. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.594168. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.El-Menyar A, Zubaid M, Almahmeed W, Alanbaei M, Rashed W, Al Qahtani A, Singh R, Zubair S, Al Suwaidi J. Initial hospital pulse pressure and cardiovascular outcomes in acute coronary syndrome. Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2011;104:435–443. doi: 10.1016/j.acvd.2011.05.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Zhang SY, Li CL, Yin J, Jiang M, Yang XF. Blood pressure variability and prognostic significance in traumatic brain injury: analysis of the eICU-CRD database. BMC Emerg Med. 2024;24:141. doi: 10.1186/s12873-024-01054-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Uryga A, Ziółkowski A, Kazimierska A, Pudełko A, Mataczyński C, Lang EW, Czosnyka M, Kasprowicz M CENTER-TBI High-Resolution ICU (HR ICU) Sub-Study Participants and Investigators; CENTER-TBI High-Resolution Sub-Study Participants and Investigators. Analysis of intracranial pressure pulse waveform in traumatic brain injury patients: a CENTER-TBI study. J Neurosurg. 2023;139:201–211. doi: 10.3171/2022.10.JNS221523. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Yumoto T, Mitsuhashi T, Yamakawa Y, Iida A, Nosaka N, Tsukahara K, Naito H, Nakao A. Impact of Cushing's sign in the prehospital setting on predicting the need for immediate neurosurgical intervention in trauma patients: a nationwide retrospective observational study. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2016;24:147. doi: 10.1186/s13049-016-0341-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Zheng RZ, Lei ZQ, Yang RZ, Huang GH, Zhang GM. Identification and Management of Paroxysmal Sympathetic Hyperactivity After Traumatic Brain Injury. Front Neurol. 2020;11:81. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2020.00081. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Tang SC, Yin JH, Liu CH, Sun MH, Lee JT, Sun Y, Hsu CS, Sun MC, Lin CH, Chen CH, Lien LM, Muo CH, Jeng JS, Hsu CY Taiwan Stroke Registry Investigators. Low Pulse Pressure After Acute Ischemic Stroke is Associated With Unfavorable Outcomes: The Taiwan Stroke Registry. J Am Heart Assoc. 2017;6:e005113. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.116.005113. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Vedin T, Svensson S, Edelhamre M, Karlsson M, Bergenheim M, Larsson PA. Management of mild traumatic brain injury-trauma energy level and medical history as possible predictors for intracranial hemorrhage. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2019;45:901–907. doi: 10.1007/s00068-018-0941-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Kirkman E, Watts S. Haemodynamic changes in trauma. Br J Anaesth. 2014;113:266–275. doi: 10.1093/bja/aeu232. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Wongsripuemtet P, Ohnuma T, Minic Z, Vavilala MS, Miller JB, Laskowitz DT, Meurer WJ, Hu X, Korley FK, Sheng H, Krishnamoorthy V. Early Autonomic Dysfunction in Traumatic Brain Injury: An Article Review on the Impact on Multiple Organ Dysfunction. J Clin Med. 2025;14:557. doi: 10.3390/jcm14020557. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Vennin S, Li Y, Willemet M, Fok H, Gu H, Charlton P, Alastruey J, Chowienczyk P. Identifying Hemodynamic Determinants of Pulse Pressure: A Combined Numerical and Physiological Approach. Hypertension. 2017;70:1176–1182. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.117.09706. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Logsdon AF, Lucke-Wold BP, Turner RC, Huber JD, Rosen CL, Simpkins JW. Role of Microvascular Disruption in Brain Damage from Traumatic Brain Injury. Compr Physiol. 2015;5:1147–1160. doi: 10.1002/cphy.c140057. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Ranjan AK, Gulati A. Controls of Central and Peripheral Blood Pressure and Hemorrhagic/Hypovolemic Shock. J Clin Med. 2023;12:1108. doi: 10.3390/jcm12031108. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Kinoshita K. Traumatic brain injury: pathophysiology for neurocritical care. J Intensive Care. 2016;4:29. doi: 10.1186/s40560-016-0138-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Lee JW, Wang W, Rezk A, Mohammed A, Macabudbud K, Englesakis M, Lele A, Zeiler FA, Chowdhury T. Hypotension and Adverse Outcomes in Moderate to Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7:e2444465. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.44465. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Carteri RB, Padilha M, de Quadros SS, Cardoso EK, Grellert M. Shock index and its variants as predictors of mortality in severe traumatic brain injury. World J Crit Care Med. 2024;13:90617. doi: 10.5492/wjccm.v13.i1.90617. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Mitra B, Singh B, Mathew J, Stewart C, Koolstra C, Hendel S, Fitzgerald M. Timing and volume of transfusion for adult major trauma patients with hemorrhagic shock: a registry-based cohort study. Trauma Surg Acute Care Open. 2024;9:e001248. doi: 10.1136/tsaco-2023-001248. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Ha EJ. Optimizing RBC Transfusion Strategies in Traumatic Brain Injury: Insights on Early Resuscitation and Cerebral Oxygenation. Korean J Neurotrauma. 2024;20:137–145. doi: 10.13004/kjnt.2024.20.e26. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Schellenberg M, Owattanapanich N, Getrajdman J, Matsushima K, Inaba K. Prehospital Narrow Pulse Pressure Predicts Need for Resuscitative Thoracotomy and Emergent Intervention After Trauma. J Surg Res. 2021;268:284–290. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2021.06.051. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Liu J, Wang S, Ji L, Wang X, Zhao H. Association between baseline pulse pressure and hospital mortality in non-traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage patients: a retrospective cohort study. Front Neurol. 2023;14:1176546. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2023.1176546. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Bhandarkar P, Munivenkatappa A, Roy N, Kumar V, Samudrala VD, Kamble J, Agrawal A. On-admission blood pressure and pulse rate in trauma patients and their correlation with mortality: Cushing's phenomenon revisited. Int J Crit Illn Inj Sci. 2017;7:14–17. doi: 10.4103/2229-5151.201950. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Manning L, Hirakawa Y, Arima H, Wang X, Chalmers J, Wang J, Lindley R, Heeley E, Delcourt C, Neal B, Lavados P, Davis SM, Tzourio C, Huang Y, Stapf C, Woodward M, Rothwell PM, Robinson TG, Anderson CS INTERACT2 investigators. Blood pressure variability and outcome after acute intracerebral haemorrhage: a post-hoc analysis of INTERACT2, a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Neurol. 2014;13:364–373. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(14)70018-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
All relevant data are presented in the manuscript, figures, and tables.