Imran Altaf1, Shahzad Shams2, Anjum Habib Vohra3. 1. Dr. Imran Altaf, MS. Department of Neurosurgery, Khawja Muhammad Safdar Medical College, Sialkot, Pakistan. 2. Dr. Shahzad Shams, FRCS, FCPS. Department of Neurosurgery, King Edward Medical University, , Lahore, Pakistan. 3. Dr. Anjum Habib Vohra, FRCS. Department of Neurosurgery, Post Graduate Medical Institute, Lahore General Hospital, Lahore, Pakistan.
Acute subdural hematoma is considered to be the most lethal traumatic brain injury.1 Mortality is high and reported mortality ranges from 40-90%.2-4 A craniotomy and decompressive craniectomy are the two main surgical options employed for evacuation of acute traumatic subdural hematoma, but studies comparing their outcome have shown inconsistent results.3,5,6 The optimal surgical procedure in patients presenting with traumatic acute subdural hematoma still to date remains controversial.6-8 The role of timing of surgery as a predictor of outcome also remains unclear, and whether early surgery improves outcome still remains controversial.1,9 The present study was designed to assess the role of these two parameters as predictors of clinical outcome in patients presenting with acute traumatic subdural hematoma.
METHODS
In this retrospective study, medical records of 58 patients with presenting GCS ≤ 8 who had undergone surgical evacuation of acute traumatic SDH from June 2014 to July 2015 at the Department of Neurosurgery, Lahore General Hospital were analyzed. Adult patients of both sexes that had been operated for acute subdural hematoma were included in the study. Acute subdural hematoma was diagnosed on CT (computed tomography) brain in all the patients. CT brain on admission was assessed for hematoma thickness and amount of midline shift. Surgical intervention either through a craniotomy or a craniectomy had been carried out in patients having a hematoma thickness of more than 10 mm on CT and a midline shift of more than 5 mm. Data was retrieved from the medical records of patients included in the study and the parameters of age, sex, preoperative GCS, surgical procedure performed and the timing of surgery were studied. Patients having concomitant intracranial pathology like a large contusion, traumatic ICH (intracerebral hematoma) or extradural hematoma were excluded. Also patients presenting with spontaneous ASDH were excluded from the study. For the surviving patients the outcome was categorized according to the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) with the Outcome being classified as “favorable” if the GOS score was 4 or 5, and as “unfavorable” if GOS score was 3 or less.Patients undergoing craniotomy were operated through a standard question mark incision followed by a frontotemporoparietal craniotomy. A decompressive craniectomy was performed either through a question mark incision and removal of the bone flap, or a linear incision over the temporal region with a large craniectomy. Dura was opened and the hematoma evacuated in all the cases.
Statistical Analysis
The craniotomy and decompressive craniectomy group were compared for age and preoperative GCS using an independent t-test, and compared for sex using a chi-square test. A chi-square test was also used to assess the relationship of survival with the type of surgical procedure performed and the timing of surgery. For all analysis, a p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Ethics committee approval
This retrospective study was approved by ethics committee on November 11, 2019, Research No. 0097-19.
RESULTS
Fifty-eight patients presenting with traumatic acute subdural hematoma and meeting the inclusion criteria were included. 40 (69%) patients underwent CO, and 18 (31%) patients underwent DC. Mean age of CO group was 42.8(SD 18.4) years, and of DC group was 47.8(SD 20.8) years. Overall there were 44 males and 14 females. The mean preoperative GCS of patients in the craniotomy group was 5.7(SD 1.32), and in the decompressive craniectomy was 5(SD 1.45). A comparison of age, gender and preoperative GCS between the craniotomy and decompressive craniectomy group did not show a significant difference between the two groups (Table-I).
Table-I
Comparison of patient demographics and preoperative GCS between the craniotomy and the craniectomy groups.
Craniotomy
Decompressive craniectomy
P - value
Gender
Male
29
15
0.3724
Female
11
3
Age
Mean ± SD (years)
42.78 ± 18.39
47.83 ± 18.48
0.3374
Pre-operative GCS
Mean ± SD
5.7±1.32
5 ±1.46
0.07624
Comparison of patient demographics and preoperative GCS between the craniotomy and the craniectomy groups.None of the eighteen patients in the decompressive craniectomy group survived (100% mortality). Six of the forty patients in the craniotomy survived (85% mortality), with four having a functionally good outcome. Overall mortality was 89.6%. The difference between the two groups was, however, not significant (p=0.083) as shown in Table-II.
Table-II
Comparison of type of surgical procedure performed between the survivors and non-survivors.
Procedure
Survivor
Non survivor
P - value
Craniotomy
6
34
0.08269
Decompressive craniectomy
0
18
Total
6
52
Comparison of type of surgical procedure performed between the survivors and non-survivors.The timing of surgery as a predictor of survival was analyzed in the craniotomy group. The relationship with survival was found not to be statistically significant (p=0.87) as shown in Table-III.
Table-III
Relationship of timing of surgery with survival.
Timing of surgery (Hours)
survivor
Non survivor
P - value
≤ 4
2
8
0.8693
4 - 10
2
14
≥ 10
2
12
Relationship of timing of surgery with survival.
DISCUSSION
Acute subdural hematoma is present in about one third of patients presenting with severe traumatic brain injuries.10,11 The mortality is high despite advances in emergency medical care and surgical techniques, and ASDH remains one of the most lethal intracranial injuries.10 Indications for surgical evacuation of ASDH include a thickness greater than 10 mm, or midline shift greater than 5mm on CT brain.12,13 In principle, the purpose of surgery is to decrease intracranial hypertension to prevent brain from secondary injury.9 Various surgical modalities such as simple burr hole trephination, CO and DC are used for evacuation of ASDH,9,10,14 but the superiority of either procedure has not yet been established.9,10The rationale behind performing DC is that DC gives flexible ICP (intracranial pressure) control and provides extra space for edematous brain tissue.8,10 However performing CO or DC for ASDH remains controversial as studies comparing them have shown conflicting results.3,5,6,8,15 Generally it is held that the results of CO are superior to that of DC.6,7,10,16,17 These findings, however, get complicated by the fact that patients in whom DC was carried out were in poor clinical status, and thus had an intrinsic layout for a poor outcome.6,10,16,17,18 Also in many of these studies although the outcome in the CO group was better, yet the comparison with the DC group showed that in some cases the difference was significant,5,6,10,17 while in others the difference was not clinically significant.16,18 This has led to a wide variation in the clinical practice of neurosurgeons around the world with some neurosurgical institutes using decompressive craniectomy, whilst others using cranioplastic craniotomies while dealing with acute subdural hematoma.7,9,19 In our study for the sake of uniformity we included only patients in whom the presenting GCS was ≤ 8. We found that all the six survivors were in the CO group with four having a good outcome. None of the patients in the DC group survived. The difference in outcome, however, did not reach clinical significance (p=0.083). Our findings are thus consistent with the findings of Li LM et al.16 and Woertgen C et al.18 that also found that although the mortality was higher in the craniectomy group as compared to the craniotomy group yet the difference did not reach clinical significance.The timing of surgery as a predictor of outcome after surgical evacuation of ASDH remains a controversial topic.1,9,12 Seelig et al.20 in their land mark study found that patients operated within 4 hours after trauma had a survival rate of 90%, as compared to a survival rate of only 30% for patients operated after four hours. But since then cohort studies from Canada, Poland, USA and UK found that timing of surgery was not predictive of outcome.1 Infect, paradoxically, Walcott et al21 found that increased time from trauma to surgery significantly reduced mortality in patients undergoing operative treatment of traumatic ASDH. We also found that timing of surgery did not have a relationship with outcome (p=0. 87) after surgical evacuation of ASDH.
Limitations of the study
This is a small size retrospective, non-randomized, single center study and thus potentially subject to diverse biases and variations. We believe that further investigation with a larger sample size, quantitative controlled prospective study is required to clarify the role of these two parameters as predictors of clinical outcome following acute subdural hematoma evacuation.
CONCLUSION
In this study craniotomy was associated with a better outcome as compared to craniectomy, however, the difference did not reach statistical significance. Early surgery was also found not to be associated with an improved outcome.
Authors’ Contribution:
IA conceived, designed, did data collection & statistical analysis & manuscript writing & editing of manuscript & is responsible for integrity of research.SS & AHV did review and final approval of manuscript.
Authors: Lucia M Li; Angelos G Kolias; Mathew R Guilfoyle; Ivan Timofeev; Elizabeth A Corteen; John D Pickard; David K Menon; Peter J Kirkpatrick; Peter J Hutchinson Journal: Acta Neurochir (Wien) Date: 2012-06-30 Impact factor: 2.216
Authors: Georgios Tsermoulas; Omid Shah; Haren Eranga Wijesinghe; Adikarige Haritha Dulanka Silva; Satheesh K Ramalingam; Antonio Belli Journal: World Neurosurg Date: 2015-10-31 Impact factor: 2.104
Authors: Daniel M Fountain; Angelos G Kolias; Fiona E Lecky; Omar Bouamra; Thomas Lawrence; Hadie Adams; Simon J Bond; Peter J Hutchinson Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2017-03 Impact factor: 12.969