Neurocritical Care

, Volume 2, Issue 2, pp 110–118 | Cite as

Subarachnoid hemorrhage grading scales

A systematic review
Review Article


Numerous systems are reported for grading the clinical condition of patients following subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). The literature was reviewed for articles pertaining to the grading of such patients, including publications on the Hunt and Hess Scale, Fisher Scale, Glasgow Coma Score (GCS), and World Federation of Neurological Surgeons Scale. This article reviews the advantages and limitations of these scales as well as more recent proposals for other grading systems based on these scales with or without addition of other factors known to be prognostic for outcome after SAH. There remain substantial deficits in the literature regarding grading of patients with SAH. Most grading scales were derived retrospectively, and the intra- and interobserver variability has seldom been assessed. Inclusion of additional factors increases the complexity of the scale, possibly making it less likely to be adopted for routine usage and increasing (only marginally in some cases) the ability to predict prognosis. Until further data are available, it is recommended that publications on patients with SAH report at least the admission GCS as well as factors commonly known to influence prognosis, such as age, pre-existing hypertension, the amount of blood present on admission computed tomography, time of admission after SAH, aneurysm location and size, presence of intracerebral or intraventricular hemorrhage, and blood pressure at admission.

Key Words

Subarachnoid hemorrhage grading system cerebral aneurysm Glasgow Coma Score 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Fox JL. Intracranial Aneurysms. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1983.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bramwell E. The etiology of recurrent ocular paralysis (including periodic ocular paralysis and ophthalmoplegic migraine). Edinburgh Med J 1933;40:209–218.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rosen DS, Macdonald RL. Grading of subarachnoid hemorrhage: modification of the world World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies scale on the basis of data for a large series of patients. Neurosurgery 2004;54:566–575.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Botterell EH, Lougheed WM, Scott JW, Vandewater SL. Hypothermia, and interruption of carotid, or carotid and vertebral circulation, in the surgical management of intracranial aneurysms. J Neurosurg 1956;13:1–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    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. J Neurosurg 1966;25:574–592.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lindsay KW, Teasdale GM, Knill-Jones RP, Murray L. Assessment of the consequences of subarachnoid haemorrhage. Acta Neurochir 1982;63:59–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hunt WE, Hess RM. Surgical risk as related to time of intervention in the repair of intracranial aneurysms. J Neurosurg 1968;28:14–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hunt WE, Kosnik EJ. Timing and perioperative care in intracranial aneurysm surgery. Clin Neurosurg 1974;21:79–89.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fisher CM, Kistler JP, Davis JM. Relation of cerebral vasospasm to subarachnoid hemorrhage visualized by computerized tomographic scanning. Neurosurgery 1980;6:1–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Teasdale G, Jennett B. Assessment of impaired consciousness and coma: a practical scale. Lancet 1974;2:81–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Drake CG, Hunt WE, Sano K, et al. Report of World Federation of Neurological Surgeons Committee on a universal subarachnoid hemorrhage grading scale. J Neurosurg 1988;68:985–986.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cavanagh SJ, Gordon VL. Grading scales used in the management of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: a critical review. J Neurosci Nurs 2002;34:288–295.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    van Gijn J, Bromberg JE, Lindsay KW, Hasan D, Vermeulen M. Definition of initial grading, specific events, and overall outcome in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. A survey. Stroke 1994;25:1623–1627.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gerber CJ, Lang DA, Neil-Dwyer G, Smith PW. A simple scoring system for accurate prediction of outcome within four days of a subarachnoid haemorrhage. Acta Neurochir 1993;122:11–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gotoh O, Tamura A, Yasui N, Nihei H, Manaka S, Suzuki A et al. [Japan coma scale in the prediction of outcome after early surgery for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage]. [Japanese]. No to Shinkei 1995;47:49–55.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gotoh O, Tamura A, Yasui N, Suzuki A, Hadeishi H, Sano K. Glasgow Coma Scale in the prediction of outcome after early aneurysm surgery. Neurosurgery 1996;39:19–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hirai S, Ono J, Yamaura A. Clinical grading and outcome after early surgery in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Neurosurgery 1996;39:441–446.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jagger J, Torner JC, Kassell NF. Neurologic assessment of subarachnoid hemorrhage in a large patient series. Surg Neurol 1989;32:327–333.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ogilvy CS, Carter BS. A proposed comprehensive grading system to predict outcome for surgical management of intracranial aneurysms. Neurosurgery 1998;42:959–968.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Oshiro EM, Walter KA, Piantadosi S, Witham TF, Tamargo RJ. A new subarachnoid hemorrhage grading system based on the Glasgow Coma Scale: a comparison with the Hunt and Hess and World Federation of Neurological Surgeons Scales in a clinical series. Neurosurgery 1997;41:140–147.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sato J, Masuzawa H, Shiraishi K, Kanazawa I, Kamitani H. [New clinical grading in ruptured cerebral aneurysm]. [Japanese]. No Shinkei Geka 1986;14:1183–1187.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Saveland H, Sonesson B, Ljunggren B, Brandt L, Uski T, Zygmunt S et al. Outcome evaluation following subarachnoid hemorrhage. J Neurosurg 1986;64:191–196.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Takagi K, Aoki M, Ishii T, et al. [Japan Coma Scale as a grading scale of subarachnoid hemorrhage: a way to determine the scale]. [Japanese]. No Shinkei Geka 1998;26:509–515.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Takagi K, Tamura A, Nakagomi T, et al. How should a subarachnoid hemorrhage grading scale be determined? A combinatorial approach based solely on the Glasgow Coma Scale. J Neurosurg 1999;90:680–687.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Claassen J, Kreiter KT, Kowalski RG, et al. Effect of acute physiologic derangements on outcome after subarachnoid hemorrhage. Crit Care Med 2004;32:832–838.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hijdra A, Brouwers PJAM, Vermeulen M, van Gijn J. Grading the amount of blood on computed tomograms after subarachnoid hemorrhage. Stroke 1990;21:1156–1161.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lindsay KW, Teasdale GM, Knill-Jones RP. Observer variability in assessing the clinical features of subarachnoid hemorrhage. J Neurosurg 1983;58:57–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kassell NF, Torner JC, Haley EC, Jr., Jane JA, Adams HP, Kongable GL. The International Cooperative Study on the Timing of Aneurysm Surgery. Part 1: Overall management results. J Neurosurg 1990;73:18–36.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Aulmann C, Steudl WI, Feldmann U. [Validation of the prognostic accuracy of neurosurgical admission scales after rupture of cerebral aneurysms]. Zentralbl Neurochir 1998;59:171–180.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Proust F, Hannequin D, Langlois O, Freger P, Creissard P. Causes of morbidity and mortality after ruptured aneurysm surgery in a series of 230 patients. The importance of control angiography. Stroke 1995;26:1553–1557.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yoshikai S, Nagata S, Ohara S, Yuhi F, Sakata S, Matsuno H. [A retrospective analysis of the outcomes of patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhages: a focus on the prognostic factors]. [Japanese]. No Shinkei Geka 1996;24:733–738.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Deruty R, Pelissou-Guyotat I, Mottolese C, Amat D, Bognar L. Level of consciousness and age as prognostic factors in aneurysmal SAH. Acta Neurochir 1995;132:1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kistler JP, Crowell RM, Davis KR, et al. The relation of cerebral vasospasm to the extent and location of subarachnoid blood visualized by CT scan: a prospective study. Neurology 1983;33:424–436.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Fujita S. Computed tomographic grading with Hounsfield number related to delayed vasospasm in cases of ruptured cerebral aneurysm. Neurosurgery 1985;17:609–612.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Inagawa T, Ohbayashi N, Kumano K. Effect of rapid spontaneous diminution of subarachnoid hemorrhage on cerebral vasospasm. Surg Neurol 1995;43:25–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Reilly C, Amidei C, Tolentino J, Jahromi BS, Macdonald RL. Clot volume and clearance rate as independent predictors of vasospasm after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. J Neurosurg 2004;101:255–261.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Choudhri TF, Hoh BL, Solomon RA. Editorial comment. Neurosurgery 1998;42:969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Pal J, Brown R, Fleiszer D. The value of the Glasgow Coma Scale and Injury Severity Score: predicting outcome in multiple trauma patients with head injury. J Trauma 1989;29:746–748.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Rocca B, Martin C, Viviand X, Bidet PF, Saint-Gilles HL, Chevalier A. Comparison of four severity scores in patients with head trauma. J Trauma 1989;29:299–305.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kennedy F, Gonzalez P, Dang C, Fleming A, Sterling-Scott R. The Glasgow Coma Scale and prognosis in gunshot wounds to the brain. J Trauma 1993;35:75–77.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Polin RS, Shaffrey ME, Phillips CD, Germanson T, Jane JA. Multivariate analysis and prediction of outcome following penetrating head injury. Neurosurg Clin N Am 1995;6:689–699.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Shaffrey ME, Polin RS, Phillips CD, Germanson T, Shaffrey CI, Jane JA. Classification of civilian craniocerebral gunshot wounds: a multivariate analysis predictive of mortality. J Neurotrauma 1992;9(Suppl 1):S279-S285.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Mase G, Zorzon M, Biasutti E, Tasca G, Vitrani B, Cazzato G. Immediate prognosis of primary intracerebral hemorrhage using an easy model for the prediction of survival. Acta Neurol Scand 1995;91:306–309.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Sacco RL, VanGool R, Mohr JP, Hauser WA. Nontraumatic coma. Glasgow coma score and coma etiology as predictors of 2-week outcome. Arch Neurol 1990;47:1181–1184.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Menegazzi JJ, Davis EA, Sucov AN, Paris PM. Reliability of the Glasgow Coma Scale when used by emergency physicians and paramedics. J Trauma 1993;34:46–48.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Teasdale G, Knill-Jones R, van der Knill-Jones SJ. Observer variability in assessing impaired consciousness and coma. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1978;41:603–610.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Rowley G, Fielding K. Reliability and accuracy of the Glasgow Coma Scale with experienced and inexperienced users. Lancet 1991;337:535–538.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Lagares A, Gomez PA, Lobato RD, Alen JF, Alday R, Campollo J. Prognostic factors on hospital admission after spontaneous subarachnoid haemorrhage. Acta Neurochir 2001;143:665–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Nishioka H. Evaluation of the conservative management of ruptured intracranial aneurysms. In: Sahs AL, Perret GE, Locksley HB, Nishioka H, eds. Intracranial Aneurysms and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage. Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1969, pp. 125–142.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Ogilvy CS, Carter BS. A proposed comprehensive grading system to predict outcome for surgical management of intracranial aneurysms. Neurosurgery 1998;42:959–970.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Kay A, Petzold A, Kerr M, Keir G, Thompson E, Nicoll J. Decreased cerebrospinal fluid apolipoprotein E after subarachnoid hemorrhage: correlation with injury severity and clinical outcome. Stroke 2003;34:637–642.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Raabe A, Grolms C, Keller M, Dohnert J, Sorge O, Seifert V. Correlation of computed tomography findings and serum brain damage markers following severe head injury. Acta Neurochir 1998;140:787–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Chiang VL, Claus EB, Awad IA. Toward more rational prediction of outcome in patients with high-grade subarachnoid hemorrhage. Neurosurgery 2000;46:28–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Jennett B, Bond M. Assessment of outcome after severe brain damage. A practical scale. Lancet 1975;1:480–484.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Germanson TP, Lanzino G, Kongable GL, Torner JC, Kassell NF, and the participants. Risk classification after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Surg Neurol 1998;49:155–163.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Humana Press Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Section of Neurosurgery, Department of SurgeryUniversity of Chicago Medical Center and Pritzker School of MedicineChicago

Personalised recommendations