Literature DB >> 21438659

Outcomes of 33 patients from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan undergoing bilateral or bicompartmental craniectomy.

Robert D Ecker1, Lisa P Mulligan, Michael Dirks, Randy S Bell, Meryl A Severson, Robin S Howard, Rocco A Armonda.   

Abstract

OBJECT: There are no published long-term data for patients with penetrating head injury treated with bilateral supratentorial craniectomy, or supra- and infratentorial craniectomy. The authors report their experience with 33 patients treated with bilateral or bicompartmental craniectomy from the ongoing conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
METHODS: An exploratory analysis of Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) scores at 6 months in 33 patients was performed. Follow-up lasting a median of more than 2 years was performed in 30 (91%) of these patients. The association of GOS score with categorical variables was explored using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test or Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance. The Spearman correlation coefficient was used for ordinal/continuous data. To provide a clinically meaningful format to present GOS scores with categorical variables, patients with GOS scores of 1-3 were categorized as having a poor outcome and those with scores of 4 and 5 as having a good outcome. This analysis does not include the patients who died in theater or in Germany who underwent bilateral decompressive craniectomy because those figures have not been released due to security concerns.
RESULTS: All patients were men with a median age of 24 years (range 19-46 years) and a median initial Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of 5 (range 3-14). At 6 months, 9 characteristics were statistically significant: focus of the initial injury, systemic infection, initial GCS score, initial GCS score excluding patients with a GCS score of 3, GCS score on arrival to the US, GCS score on dismissal from the medical center, Injury Severity Score, and patients with cerebrovascular injury. Six factors were significant at long-term follow-up: focus of initial injury, systemic infection, initial GCS score excluding patients with a GCS score of 3, GCS score on arrival to the US, and GCS score on dismissal from the medical center. At long-term follow-up, 7 (23%) of 30 patients had died, 5 (17%) of 30 had a GOS score of 2 or 3, and 18 (60%) of 30 had a GOS score of 4 or 5.
CONCLUSIONS: In this selected group of patients who underwent bilateral or bicompartmental craniectomy, 60% are independent at long-term follow-up. Patients with bifrontal injury fared best. Systemic infection and cerebrovascular injury corresponded with a worse outcome.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21438659     DOI: 10.3171/2011.2.JNS101490

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg        ISSN: 0022-3085            Impact factor:   5.115


  9 in total

1.  Bicompartmental Decompressive Craniectomy: Report of Two Cases.

Authors:  Saad Akhtar; Badar Ujjan; Muhammad Waqas; Muhammad Waqas Khan; Gohar Javed
Journal:  Surg J (N Y)       Date:  2015-10-13

2.  Rationale and Methods for Updated Guidelines for the Management of Penetrating Traumatic Brain Injury.

Authors:  Gregory W J Hawryluk; Shelley Selph; Angela Lumba-Brown; Annette M Totten; Jamshid Ghajar; Bizhan Aarabi; James Ecklund; Stacy Shackelford; Britton Adams; David Adelson; Rocco A Armonda; John Benjamin; Darrell Boone; David Brody; Bradley Dengler; Anthony Figaji; Gerald Grant; Odette Harris; Alan Hoffer; Ryan Kitigawa; Kerry Latham; Christopher Neal; David O Okonkwo; Dylan Pannell; Jeffrey V Rosenfeld; Guy Rosenthal; Andres Rubiano; Deborah M Stein; Martina Stippler; Max Talbot; Alex Valadka; David W Wright; Shelton Davis; Randy Bell
Journal:  Neurotrauma Rep       Date:  2022-06-21

3.  Anti-epileptic prophylaxis in traumatic brain injury: A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing craniotomy versus decompressive craniectomy.

Authors:  Vivek Ramakrishnan; Robert Dahlin; Omid Hariri; Syed A Quadri; Saman Farr; Dan Miulli; Javed Siddiqi
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2015-01-20

Review 4.  Current concepts in penetrating and blast injury to the central nervous system.

Authors:  Jeffrey V Rosenfeld; Randy S Bell; Rocco Armonda
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 3.352

5.  Study of the long-term results of decompressive craniectomy after severe traumatic brain injury based on a series of 60 consecutive cases.

Authors:  Gaétane Gouello; Olivier Hamel; Karim Asehnoune; Eric Bord; Roger Robert; Kevin Buffenoir
Journal:  ScientificWorldJournal       Date:  2014-02-24

Review 6.  The Role of Decompressive Craniectomy in Limited Resource Environments.

Authors:  Angélica Clavijo; Ahsan A Khan; Juliana Mendoza; Jorge H Montenegro; Erica D Johnson; Amos O Adeleye; Andrés M Rubiano
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2019-02-26       Impact factor: 4.003

7.  Decompressive craniectomy for the treatment of high intracranial pressure in closed traumatic brain injury.

Authors:  Juan Sahuquillo; Jane A Dennis
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-12-31

8.  Intrathecal decompression versus epidural decompression in the treatment of severe spinal cord injury in rat model: a randomized, controlled preclinical research.

Authors:  Jian Zhang; Huili Wang; Chenggang Zhang; Weiguang Li
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2016-03-22       Impact factor: 2.359

9.  Decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury: clinical study, literature review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Gene A Grindlinger; David H Skavdahl; Robert D Ecker; Matthew R Sanborn
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2016-09-20
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.