MyMedR

Displaying all 4 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

Fulltext Consensus statement from the International Consensus Meeting on the Role of Decompressive Craniectomy in the Management of Traumatic Brain Injury : Consensus statement

Hutchinson PJ, Kolias AG, Tajsic T, Adeleye A, Aklilu AT, Apriawan T, et al.

Acta Neurochir (Wien), 2019 Jul;161(7):1261-1274.
PMID: 31134383 DOI: 10.1007/s00701-019-03936-y

BACKGROUND: Two randomised trials assessing the effectiveness of decompressive craniectomy (DC) following traumatic brain injury (TBI) were published in recent years: DECRA in 2011 and RESCUEicp in 2016. As the results have generated debate amongst clinicians and researchers working in the field of TBI worldwide, it was felt necessary to provide general guidance on the use of DC following TBI and identify areas of ongoing uncertainty via a consensus-based approach.
METHODS: The International Consensus Meeting on the Role of Decompressive Craniectomy in the Management of Traumatic Brain Injury took place in Cambridge, UK, on the 28th and 29th September 2017. The meeting was jointly organised by the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies (WFNS), AO/Global Neuro and the NIHR Global Health Research Group on Neurotrauma. Discussions and voting were organised around six pre-specified themes: (1) primary DC for mass lesions, (2) secondary DC for intracranial hypertension, (3) peri-operative care, (4) surgical technique, (5) cranial reconstruction and (6) DC in low- and middle-income countries.
RESULTS: The invited participants discussed existing published evidence and proposed consensus statements. Statements required an agreement threshold of more than 70% by blinded voting for approval.
CONCLUSIONS: In this manuscript, we present the final consensus-based recommendations. We have also identified areas of uncertainty, where further research is required, including the role of primary DC, the role of hinge craniotomy and the optimal timing and material for skull reconstruction.

Matched MeSH terms: Decompressive Craniectomy/methods*
Addition of zygomatic arch resection in decompressive craniectomy

Martin AG, Abdullah JY, Jaafar A, Ghani AR, Rajion ZA, Abdullah JM

J Clin Neurosci, 2015 Apr;22(4):735-9.
PMID: 25564264 DOI: 10.1016/j.jocn.2014.09.021

Decompressive craniectomy (DC) is a surgical option in managing uncontrolled raised intracranial pressure refractory to medical therapy. The authors evaluate the addition of zygomatic arch (ZA) resection with standard DC and analyze the resulting increase in brain volume using three-dimensional volumetric CT scans. Measurements of brain expansion dimension morphometrics from CT images were also analyzed. Eighteen patients were selected and underwent DC with ZA resection. The pre- and post-operative CT images were analyzed for volume and dimensional changes. CT images of 29 patients previously operated on at the same center were retrieved from the picture archiving and communication system (PACS) and were similarly studied. The findings obtained from the two groups were compared and analyzed. Analysis from three-dimensional CT volumetric techniques revealed an significant increase of 27.97ml (95% confidence interval [CI]: 39.98-180.36; p=0.048) when compared with standard DC. Brain expansion analysis of maximum hemicraniectomy diameter revealed a mean difference of 0.82cm (95% CI: 0.25-1.38; p=0.006). Analysis of the ratio of maximum hemicraniectomy diameter to maximum anteroposterior diameter gave a mean difference of 0.04 (95% CI: 0.05-0.07; p=0.026). The addition of ZA resection to standard DC may prove valuable in terms of absolute brain volume gain. This technique is comparable to other maneuvers used to provide maximum brain expansion in the immediate post-operative period.

Matched MeSH terms: Decompressive Craniectomy/methods*
Fulltext Intracranial bleeding (ICB) as a catastrophic complication of Streptococcus gordonii infective endocarditis (IE) in an immunocompetent patient

Pairan MS, Mohammad N, Abdul Halim S, Wan Ghazali WS

BMJ Case Rep, 2018 Sep 10;2018.
PMID: 30206067 DOI: 10.1136/bcr-2018-225265

We present an interesting case of late-onset intracranial bleeding (ICB) as a complication of Streptococcus gordonii causing infective endocarditis. A previously healthy young woman was diagnosed with infective endocarditis. While she was already on treatment for 2 weeks, she had developed seizures with a localising neurological sign. An urgent non-contrasted CT brain showed massive left frontoparietal intraparenchymal bleeding. Although CT angiogram showed no evidence of active bleeding or contrast blush, massive ICB secondary to vascular complication of infective endocarditis was very likely. An urgent decompressive craniectomy with clot evacuation was done immediately to release the mass effect. She completed total 6 weeks of antibiotics and had postoperative uneventful hospital stay despite having a permanent global aphasia as a sequel of the ICB.

Matched MeSH terms: Decompressive Craniectomy/methods
Vacuum Drains versus Passive Drains versus No Drains in Decompressive Craniectomies-A Randomized Controlled Trial on Subgaleal Drain Complication Rates (VADER Trial)

Sam JE, Kandasamy R, Wong ASH, Ghani ARI, Ang SY, Idris Z, et al.

World Neurosurg, 2021 12;156:e381-e391.
PMID: 34563715 DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2021.09.074

OBJECTIVE: Subgaleal drains are generally deemed necessary for cranial surgeries including decompressive craniectomies (DCs) to avoid excessive postoperative subgaleal hematoma (SGH) formation. Many surgeries have moved away from routine prophylactic drainage but the role of subgaleal drainage in cranial surgeries has not been addressed.
METHODS: This was a randomized controlled trial at 2 centers. A total of 78 patients requiring DC were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio into 3 groups: vacuum drains (VD), passive drains (PD), and no drains (ND). Complications studied were need for surgical revision, SGH amount, new remote hematomas, postcraniectomy hydrocephalus (PCH), functional outcomes, and mortality.
RESULTS: Only 1 VD patient required surgical revision to evacuate SGH. There was no difference in SGH thickness and volume among the 3 drain types (P = 0.171 and P = 0.320, respectively). Rate of new remote hematoma and PCH was not significantly different (P = 0.647 and P = 0.083, respectively), but the ND group did not have any patient with PCH. In the subgroup analysis of 49 patients with traumatic brain injury, the SGH amount of the PD and ND group was significantly higher than that of the VD group. However, these higher amounts did not translate as a significant risk factor for poor functional outcome or mortality. VD may have better functional outcome and mortality.
CONCLUSIONS: In terms of complication rates, VD, PD, and ND may be used safely in DC. A higher amount of SGH was not associated with poorer outcomes. Further studies are needed to clarify the advantage of VD regarding functional outcome and mortality, and if ND reduces PCH rates.

Matched MeSH terms: Decompressive Craniectomy/methods*