OBJECTIVE: Decompressive craniectomy is often emergently performed in an effort to reduce intracranial hypertension. After this urgent intervention, brain-injured patients often start rehabilitation programs but are left with a skull defect. Cranioplasty is often performed in these situations in order to repair this defect, mainly for cosmetic reasons and/or the patient's safety. The possible effects of this breach on the patients' neurological recovery are poorly understood and have been scarcely evaluated until now. The effect of cranioplasty on cognitive and motor functions in severely brain-injured individuals remains controversial. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: In order to further support evidence of the beneficial effects of cranioplasty on motor and cognitive function in severely brain-injured individuals, we discuss four cases, retrospectively selected among a cohort of several patients who underwent decompressive craniectomy after severe brain injury. The selected patients presented a biphasic pattern of recovery of cognitive and motor performance consisting of an initial improvement, followed by a progressive worsening of neurological signs and symptoms, and, ultimately, an unexpected recovery of function following cranioplasty. MAIN OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: In all four cases, we found a deterioration of motor and neuropsychological deficits prior to cranioplasty and a subsequent unexpected improvement in performance on a neuropsychological battery and a series of motor function tests immediately after cranioplasty. CONCLUSIONS: Results give clear evidence that a subset of patients are negatively affected by the persistence of a breach in skull integrity during the rehabilitation phase of brain injury. Moreover, they show that the repair of the cranial defect can trigger relevant neurological improvement in both motor and cognitive domains. This possibility should serve as a reminder to rehabilitation clinicians to give serious consideration to prompt performance of cranioplasty during the time allotted for the rehabilitation of these patients.
OBJECTIVE: Decompressive craniectomy is often emergently performed in an effort to reduce intracranial hypertension. After this urgent intervention, brain-injured patients often start rehabilitation programs but are left with a skull defect. Cranioplasty is often performed in these situations in order to repair this defect, mainly for cosmetic reasons and/or the patient's safety. The possible effects of this breach on the patients' neurological recovery are poorly understood and have been scarcely evaluated until now. The effect of cranioplasty on cognitive and motor functions in severely brain-injured individuals remains controversial. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: In order to further support evidence of the beneficial effects of cranioplasty on motor and cognitive function in severely brain-injured individuals, we discuss four cases, retrospectively selected among a cohort of several patients who underwent decompressive craniectomy after severe brain injury. The selected patients presented a biphasic pattern of recovery of cognitive and motor performance consisting of an initial improvement, followed by a progressive worsening of neurological signs and symptoms, and, ultimately, an unexpected recovery of function following cranioplasty. MAIN OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: In all four cases, we found a deterioration of motor and neuropsychological deficits prior to cranioplasty and a subsequent unexpected improvement in performance on a neuropsychological battery and a series of motor function tests immediately after cranioplasty. CONCLUSIONS: Results give clear evidence that a subset of patients are negatively affected by the persistence of a breach in skull integrity during the rehabilitation phase of brain injury. Moreover, they show that the repair of the cranial defect can trigger relevant neurological improvement in both motor and cognitive domains. This possibility should serve as a reminder to rehabilitation clinicians to give serious consideration to prompt performance of cranioplasty during the time allotted for the rehabilitation of these patients.
Authors: Kingsley O Abode-Iyamah; Hsiu-Yin Chiang; Nolan Winslow; Brian Park; Mario Zanaty; Brian J Dlouhy; Oliver E Flouty; Zachary D Rasmussen; Loreen A Herwaldt; Jeremy D Greenlee Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2017-05-12 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Gabriele Ronchetti; Pier Paolo Panciani; Roberto Stefini; Giannantonio Spena; Marco Maria Fontanella Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2014-01-14 Impact factor: 3.411