Han-Song Sheng1,2, Nu Zhang2, Jian Lin2, Fen-Chun Lin2, Bo Yin2, Mao-de Wang3. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, First Affiliated Hospital of Medical College of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, Second Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, China. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, First Affiliated Hospital of Medical College of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China. wzneurosurgery@hotmail.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Surgical management of cranial burst fracture (CBF) usually involves craniotomy to remove the devitalized brain tissues, followed by watertight repair of dural tears. However, there were times when the dural tear was so extensive that a substantially large bone flap would have to be removed in order to expose the retracted dural margins before it could be repaired. In such cases, strict dural repair would incur a significantly higher risk of damages to the surrounding neural tissues and severe bleeding, especially when the fracture was in the vicinity of eloquent cortical areas and sinus. Basing on our own clinical experiences, we suggest strict dural closure is not mandatory for these selected patients. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent cranial surgery for CBF at our hospital was performed. Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans were performed to evaluate the extent of dural and brain laceration and the existence of extra-cranial cerebral tissues. Routine craniotomy was delivered to remove the lacerated brain tissues and evacuate the hematoma. The dural defect was only partially fixed with patient's own tissues or artificial dura patch. Then the fractured bone flaps were restored using titanium micro plates and screws. Data including preoperative neurological status, surgery related complications, postoperative cranial fracture healing, and clinical outcomes were obtained through clinical and radiological examinations. RESULTS: From October 2004 to March 2013, a total of four patients diagnosed with CBF were treated by this dural closure sparing technique. Their average age was 18.4 months old and the average area of the skull defects was 91 cm(2), with an average interval between primary injury and surgery of 13 days. The diagnosis of CBF was confirmed by intraoperative findings like extrusion of cerebral tissues out of the lacerated dura mater and skull defects. The postoperative courses were uneventful and all patients' neurological functions improved after surgery. Postoperative three dimensional CT reconstruction of the cranial vault showed the skull fractures healed properly in all patients. No patient developed posttraumatic cerebrospinal fluid leak or epilepsy during the on average 24-month follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: In those selected cases of CBF in whom an extraordinary large craniotomy would be required to expose the entire retracted dura margins, given satisfactory evacuation of devitalized brain tissues and restoration of the bone flaps were achieved, we suggest strict dura closure is not compulsory.
OBJECTIVES: Surgical management of cranial burst fracture (CBF) usually involves craniotomy to remove the devitalized brain tissues, followed by watertight repair of dural tears. However, there were times when the dural tear was so extensive that a substantially large bone flap would have to be removed in order to expose the retracted dural margins before it could be repaired. In such cases, strict dural repair would incur a significantly higher risk of damages to the surrounding neural tissues and severe bleeding, especially when the fracture was in the vicinity of eloquent cortical areas and sinus. Basing on our own clinical experiences, we suggest strict dural closure is not mandatory for these selected patients. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent cranial surgery for CBF at our hospital was performed. Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans were performed to evaluate the extent of dural and brain laceration and the existence of extra-cranial cerebral tissues. Routine craniotomy was delivered to remove the lacerated brain tissues and evacuate the hematoma. The dural defect was only partially fixed with patient's own tissues or artificial dura patch. Then the fractured bone flaps were restored using titanium micro plates and screws. Data including preoperative neurological status, surgery related complications, postoperative cranial fracture healing, and clinical outcomes were obtained through clinical and radiological examinations. RESULTS: From October 2004 to March 2013, a total of four patients diagnosed with CBF were treated by this dural closure sparing technique. Their average age was 18.4 months old and the average area of the skull defects was 91 cm(2), with an average interval between primary injury and surgery of 13 days. The diagnosis of CBF was confirmed by intraoperative findings like extrusion of cerebral tissues out of the lacerated dura mater and skull defects. The postoperative courses were uneventful and all patients' neurological functions improved after surgery. Postoperative three dimensional CT reconstruction of the cranial vault showed the skull fractures healed properly in all patients. No patient developed posttraumatic cerebrospinal fluid leak or epilepsy during the on average 24-month follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: In those selected cases of CBF in whom an extraordinary large craniotomy would be required to expose the entire retracted dura margins, given satisfactory evacuation of devitalized brain tissues and restoration of the bone flaps were achieved, we suggest strict dura closure is not compulsory.