World neurosurgery · 2019
A Comparative Analysis Between Four-Quadrant Osteoplastic Decompressive Craniotomy versus Conventional Decompressive Craniectomy for Traumatic Brain Injury.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Vankipuram Siddharth, Sasane Sumeet V, Chandra Anil, Ojha Bal K, Singh Sunil K, Srivastava Chhitij, Jaiswal Somil, Bajaj Ankur, Jaiswal Manish
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Primary decompressive craniectomy (DC) is indicated to evacuate the hematoma and reduce intracranial pressure in traumatic brain injury (TBI). However, there are a myriad of complications because of absence of the bone flap. A novel technique, four-quadrant osteoplastic decompressive craniotomy (FoQOsD) retains the bone flap while achieving adequate cerebral decompression.
METHODS: A single-center randomized controlled trial of 115 patients with TBI needing decompressive surgery was conducted. Of these patients, 59 underwent DC and 56 underwent FoQOsD. The primary outcome determined was functional status at 6 months using the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended.
RESULTS: No significant differences were identified in baseline characteristics between both groups. Mean Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended score was comparable at 6 months (4.28 in DC vs. 4.38 in FoQOsD; P = 0.856). Further, 22 of 58 patients in the DC group had died (38%) compared with 25 of 55 patients in the FoQOsD group (44.6%) (odds ratio [OR], 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6-2.36; P = 0.6) (1 patient lost to follow-up in each group). A favorable outcome was seen in 56.8% of patients in the DC group versus 54.4% of patients in the FoQOsD group (P = 0.74). Presence of intraventricular hemorrhage and subarachnoid hemorrhage (OR, 7.17; 95% CI, 1.364-37.7; P = 0.020), opposite side contusions (OR, 3.838; 95% CI, 1.614-9.131; P = 0.002) and anisocoria (OR, 3.235; 95% CI, 1.490-7.026; P = 0.003) preoperatively were individual factors that played a significant role in final outcome.
CONCLUSIONS: FoQOsD is as efficacious as conventional DC with the added benefit of avoiding a second surgery. The procedure is associated with better cosmesis and fewer complications.
METHODS: A single-center randomized controlled trial of 115 patients with TBI needing decompressive surgery was conducted. Of these patients, 59 underwent DC and 56 underwent FoQOsD. The primary outcome determined was functional status at 6 months using the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended.
RESULTS: No significant differences were identified in baseline characteristics between both groups. Mean Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended score was comparable at 6 months (4.28 in DC vs. 4.38 in FoQOsD; P = 0.856). Further, 22 of 58 patients in the DC group had died (38%) compared with 25 of 55 patients in the FoQOsD group (44.6%) (odds ratio [OR], 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6-2.36; P = 0.6) (1 patient lost to follow-up in each group). A favorable outcome was seen in 56.8% of patients in the DC group versus 54.4% of patients in the FoQOsD group (P = 0.74). Presence of intraventricular hemorrhage and subarachnoid hemorrhage (OR, 7.17; 95% CI, 1.364-37.7; P = 0.020), opposite side contusions (OR, 3.838; 95% CI, 1.614-9.131; P = 0.002) and anisocoria (OR, 3.235; 95% CI, 1.490-7.026; P = 0.003) preoperatively were individual factors that played a significant role in final outcome.
CONCLUSIONS: FoQOsD is as efficacious as conventional DC with the added benefit of avoiding a second surgery. The procedure is associated with better cosmesis and fewer complications.