Journal of neuro-ophthalmology : the official journal of the North American Neuro-Ophthalmology Society · 2006
Third, fourth, and sixth cranial nerve palsies following closed head injury.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Dhaliwal Avninder, West Adrienne L, Trobe Jonathan D, Musch David C
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The relationship between the circumstances and severity of closed head injury (CHI) and the clinical and imaging features of cranial nerve 3, 4, and 6 palsies has not been rigorously addressed in a large study.
METHODS: Retrospective chart review of 210 consecutive patients with CHI examined at a single tertiary care center from 1987 to 2002. Patients were located by searching the ophthalmology inpatient consultation and neuro-ophthalmology outpatient databases and hospital emergency room billing codes for a diagnosis of traumatic 3, 4, or 6 cranial nerve palsy (Cranial Nerve Injury Group) and a diagnosis of CHI without traumatic 3, 4, or 6 nerve palsy (Control Group). The Cranial Nerve Injury Group was then subdivided into two groups: those with injuries to an individual cranial nerve and those with multiple (including bilateral) cranial nerve injuries. Comparisons between groups were based on age, gender, type of accident, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), documented loss of consciousness (LOC), type of ocular injury, presence of systemic injury, need for rehabilitation, physical therapy and cognitive scores, and imaging features.
RESULTS: The Cranial Nerve Injury Group had a significantly higher severity of head injury, more CT abnormalities, and worse short-term neurologic outcomes as compared with the Control Group. These trends were also found when each cranial nerve injury subgroup was compared with the Control Group. Those with cranial nerve 3 palsy had the most severe head injury; those with cranial nerve 4 palsy had an intermediate level of head injury; and those with cranial nerve 6 palsy had the lowest level of head injury. There were no consistent associations between the location of the imaging abnormalities and which cranial nerve was damaged.
CONCLUSIONS: CHI with palsy of an ocular motor nerve was more severe than CHI without ocular motor nerve palsy, as measured by the GCS, intracranial and skull imaging abnormalities, and a greater frequency of inpatient rehabilitation. Palsy of cranial nerve 3 was associated with relatively more severe CHI than was palsy of cranial nerves 4 or 6. The location of the imaging abnormalities did not correlate with a particular cranial nerve injury.
METHODS: Retrospective chart review of 210 consecutive patients with CHI examined at a single tertiary care center from 1987 to 2002. Patients were located by searching the ophthalmology inpatient consultation and neuro-ophthalmology outpatient databases and hospital emergency room billing codes for a diagnosis of traumatic 3, 4, or 6 cranial nerve palsy (Cranial Nerve Injury Group) and a diagnosis of CHI without traumatic 3, 4, or 6 nerve palsy (Control Group). The Cranial Nerve Injury Group was then subdivided into two groups: those with injuries to an individual cranial nerve and those with multiple (including bilateral) cranial nerve injuries. Comparisons between groups were based on age, gender, type of accident, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), documented loss of consciousness (LOC), type of ocular injury, presence of systemic injury, need for rehabilitation, physical therapy and cognitive scores, and imaging features.
RESULTS: The Cranial Nerve Injury Group had a significantly higher severity of head injury, more CT abnormalities, and worse short-term neurologic outcomes as compared with the Control Group. These trends were also found when each cranial nerve injury subgroup was compared with the Control Group. Those with cranial nerve 3 palsy had the most severe head injury; those with cranial nerve 4 palsy had an intermediate level of head injury; and those with cranial nerve 6 palsy had the lowest level of head injury. There were no consistent associations between the location of the imaging abnormalities and which cranial nerve was damaged.
CONCLUSIONS: CHI with palsy of an ocular motor nerve was more severe than CHI without ocular motor nerve palsy, as measured by the GCS, intracranial and skull imaging abnormalities, and a greater frequency of inpatient rehabilitation. Palsy of cranial nerve 3 was associated with relatively more severe CHI than was palsy of cranial nerves 4 or 6. The location of the imaging abnormalities did not correlate with a particular cranial nerve injury.