Craniotomy or Craniectomy for Acute Subdural Hematoma? Difference in Patient Characteristics and Outcomes at a Tertiary Care Hospital

Comparison of Craniotomy Versus Decompressive Craniectomy for Acute Subdural Hematoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Acute subdural hematoma (ASDH) is a common critical neurosurgical condition, often requiring immediate surgical intervention. Craniotomy and decompressive craniectomy are the 2 mainstay surgical approaches. This comprehensive review and meta-analysis aims to summarize the existing evidence and compare the outcomes of these 2 procedures.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and CINAHL electronic databases were searched for relevant studies, published between inception of databases till June 2023. Eligible studies reported data of patients diagnosed with ASDH who underwent craniotomy or decompressive craniectomy for ASDH. Outcome measures included the Glasgow Coma Scale score, residual subdural hematoma, requirement of revision surgery, poorer outcomes, and mortality. Data were presented as pooled odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Quality assessment and risk of bias were performed for each study.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies with a total of 3095 patients were included. The results showed that patients who underwent craniotomy had significantly lower mortality, lower odds of poorer outcomes, and a higher rate of residual subdural hematoma, compared to patients who underwent decompressive craniectomy. There was no significant difference in the requirement of revision surgery between the 2 groups. Heterogeneity was high for most outcomes, and the quality of evidence ranged from moderate to low.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that craniotomy is associated with better clinical outcomes and lower mortality compared to decompressive craniectomy for ASDH, but a higher rate of residual subdural hematoma. Further high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to validate our findings.

A ten-year retrospective analysis of decompressive craniectomy or craniotomy after severe brain injury and its implications for donation after brain death

Craniotomy or decompressive craniectomy are among the therapeutic options to prevent or treat secondary damage after severe brain injury. The choice of procedure depends, among other things, on the type and severity of the initial injury. It remains controversial whether both procedures influence the neurological outcome differently. Thus, estimating the risk of brain herniation and death and consequently potential organ donation remains difficult. All patients at the University Hospital Münster for whom an isolated craniotomy or decompressive craniectomy was performed as a treatment after severe brain injury between 2013 and 2022 were retrospectively included. Proportion of survivors and deceased were evaluated. Deceased were further analyzed regarding anticoagulants, comorbidities, type of brain injury, potential and utilized donation after brain death. 595 patients were identified, 296 patients survived, and 299 deceased. Proportion of decompressive craniectomy was higher than craniotomy in survivors (89% vs. 11%, p < 0.001). Brain death was diagnosed in 12 deceased and 10 donations were utilized. Utilized donations were comparable after both procedures (5% vs. 2%, p = 0.194). Preserved brain stem reflexes as a reason against donation did not differ between decompressive craniectomy or craniotomy (32% vs. 29%, p = 0.470). Patients with severe brain injury were more likely to survive after decompressive craniectomy than craniotomy. Among the deceased, potential and utilized donations did not differ between both procedures. This suggests that brain death can occur independent of the previous neurosurgical procedure and that organ donation should always be considered in end-of-life decisions for patients with a fatal prognosis.

Comparing surgical outcomes: Craniotomy versus decompressive craniectomy in acute subdural hematoma - A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Acute subdural hematomas (SDH) pose a significant health risk, often resulting from traumatic head injuries. The choice between surgical interventions, craniotomy, and decompressive craniectomy, remains a subject of debate. This meta-analysis aims to compare outcomes and guide clinical decision-making.

Methods

Following PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted in databases such as Ovid Medline, PubMed, and Cochrane, up to December 2023. Selection criteria included studies comparing craniotomy and decompressive craniectomy for acute SDH. Data extraction utilized the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Tool, and statistical analysis employed the random-effects model.

Results

The meta-analysis included 17 studies and 6848 patients. Craniotomy demonstrated a significant reduction in mortality rates (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.73-0.89, P < 0.0001). GCS scores favored craniotomy for severe cases. GOS outcomes showed a trend favoring craniotomy, particularly in good recovery (RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.04-1.74, P = 0.03). Additional factors explored included co-existing sub-epidural hematoma, mydriasis, extracranial injuries, residual SDH, revision rates, and intracranial pressure.

Conclusion

The meta-analysis suggests that craniotomy may be a favorable surgical strategy for acute SDH, displaying a significant decrease in mortality rates and a lower risk of raised intracranial pressure. However, the nuanced nature of outcomes emphasizes the need for a tailored approach, considering broader clinical contexts. Future research should address limitations and provide a basis for well-informed clinical decision-making.

Comparative efficacy of craniotomy versus craniectomy in surgical management of acute subdural hematoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Acute subdural hematoma (ASDH), a predominantly lethal neurosurgical emergency in the settings of traumatic brain injury, requires surgical evacuation of hematoma, via craniotomy or craniectomy. The clinical practices vary, with no consensus over the superiority of either procedure.

AIM

To evaluate whether craniotomy or craniectomy is the optimal approach for surgical evacuation of ASDH.

METHODS

After a comprehensive search of PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) up to January 2024, to identify relevant studies, a meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model, and risk ratios were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For quality assessment, the Cochrane risk of bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were applied.

RESULTS

Out of 2143 potentially relevant studies, 1875 were deemed suitable for screening. Eighteen studies were included in the systematic review. Thirteen studies, in which 1589 patients underwent craniotomy and 1452 patients underwent craniectomy, allowed meta-analysis. Pooled estimates showed that there was no significant correlation of mortality at 6 months (RR 1.14;95 % CI; 0.94-1.38 P = 0.18) and 12 months (RR 1.17; 95 % CI; 0.84-1.63 P = 0.36) with the two surgical modalities. A positive association was observed between improved functional outcomes at 6-months and craniotomy (RR 0.76; 95 % CI; 0.62-0.93 P = 0.008), however, no significant difference was observed between the two treatment groups at 12 months follow-up (RR 0.89; 95 % CI; 0.72-1.09 P = 0.26). Craniotomy reported a significantly higher proportion of patients discharged to home (RR 0.63; 95 % CI; 0.49-0.83 P = 0.0007), whereas incidence of residual subdural hematoma was significantly lower in the craniectomy group (RR 0.70; 95 % CI; 0.52-0.94 P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

Craniectomy is associated with poor clinical outcomes. However, with long-term follow-up, no difference in mortality and functional outcomes is observed in either of the patient populations. On account of equivocal evidence regarding the efficacy of craniectomy over craniotomy in the realm of long-term outcomes, utmost preference shall be directed toward craniotomy as it is less invasive and associated with fewer complications.

Surgical strategies in acute subdural hematoma: a meta-analysis of decompressive craniectomy vs. craniotomy

OBJECTIVE

Acute subdural hematoma (ASDH) stands as a significant contributor to morbidity after severe traumatic brain injuries (TBI). The primary treatment approach for patients experiencing progressive neurological deficits or notable mass effects is the surgical removal of the hematoma, which can be achieved through craniotomy (CO) or decompressive craniectomy (DC). Nevertheless, the choice between these two procedures remains a subject of ongoing debate and controversy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive literature review, utilizing prominent online databases and manually searching references related to craniotomy and craniectomy for subdural hematoma evacuation up to November 2023. Our analysis focused on outcome variables such as the presence of residual subdural hematoma, the need for revision procedures, and overall clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

We included a total of 11 comparative studies in our analysis, encompassing 4269 patients, with 2979 undergoing craniotomy and 1290 undergoing craniectomy, meeting the inclusion criteria. Patients who underwent craniectomy displayed significantly lower scores on the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) during their initial presentation. Following surgery, the DC group exhibited a significantly reduced rate of residual subdural (P = 0.009). Additionally, the likelihood of a poor outcome during follow-up was lower in the CO group. Likewise, the mortality rate was lower in the CO group compared to the craniectomy group (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.41-0.98, I2 = 84%, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Our study found that CO was associated with more favorable outcomes in terms of mortality, reoperation rate, and functional outcome while DC was associated with less likelihood of residual subdural hematoma. Upon further investigation of patient characteristics who underwent into either of these interventions, it was very clear that patients in DC cohort have more serious and low pre-op characteristics than the CO group. Nonetheless, brain herniation and advanced age act as independent factor for predicting the outcome irrespective of the intervention.

Craniotomy versus craniectomy for traumatic acute subdural hematoma-coarsened exact matched analysis of outcomes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Acute subdural hematoma (aSDH) after traumatic brain injury frequently requires emergent craniotomy (CO) or decompressive craniectomy (DC). We sought to determine the variables associated with either surgical approach and to compare outcomes between matched patients.

METHODS

A multi-center retrospective review was used to identify traumatic aSDH patients who underwent CO or DC. Patient variables independently associated with surgical approach were used for coarsened exact matching.Multivariate logistic regression and multivariate Cox proportional-hazards regression wereconducted on matched patients to determine independent predictors of mortality.

RESULTS

Seventy-six patients underwent CO and sixty-two underwent DC for aSDH evacuation. DC patients were21.4 years younger (P < 0.001), more likely to be male (80.6 % vs 60.5 %,P = 0.011), and present with GCS ≤ 8 (64.5 % vs 36.8 %,P = 0.001). Age (P < 0.001), epidural hematoma (P = 0.01), skull fracture (P = 0.001), and cisternal effacement (P = 0.02) were independently associated with surgical approach. After coarsened exact matching, DC (P = 0.008), older age (P = 0.007), male sex (P = 0.04), and intraventricular hemorrhage (P = 0.02), were independently associated with inpatient mortality. Multivariate Cox proportional-hazards regression demonstrated that DC was independently associated with mortality at 90-days (P = 0.001) and 1-year post-operation (P = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

aSDH patients who receive surgical evacuation via DC as opposed to CO are younger, more likely to be male, and have worse clinical exam. After controlling for patient differences via coarsened exact matching, DC is independently associated with mortality.

Prognostic Factors of Mortality and Functional Outcome for Acute Subdural Hematoma: A Review Article

Acute subdural hematoma (ASDH) is the most frequent intracranial traumatic lesion requiring surgery in high-income countries. To date, uncertainty remains regarding the odds of mortality or functional outcome of patients with ASDH, regardless of whether they are operated on. This review aims to shed light on the clinical and radiologic factors associated with ASDH outcome. A scoping review was conducted on Medline database from inception to 2023. This review yielded 41 patient series. In the general population, specific clinical (admission Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS], abnormal pupil exam, time to surgery, decompressive craniectomy, raised postoperative intracranial pressure) and radiologic (ASDH thickness, midline shift, thickness/midline shift ratio, uncal herniation, and brain density difference) factors were associated with mortality (grade III). Other clinical (admission GCS, decompressive craniectomy) and radiologic (ASDH volume, thickness/midline shift ratio, uncal herniation, loss of basal cisterns, petechiae, and brain density difference) factors were associated with functional outcome (grade III). In the elderly, only postoperative GCS and midline shift on brain computed tomography were associated with mortality (grade III). Comorbidities, abnormal pupil examination, postoperative GCS, intensive care unit hospitalization, and midline shift were associated with functional outcome (grade III). Based on these factors, the SHE (Subdural Hematoma in the Elderly) and the RASH (Richmond Acute Subdural Hematoma) scores could be used in daily clinical practice. This review has underlined a few supplementary factors of prognostic interest in patients with ASDH, and highlighted two predictive scores that could be used in clinical practice to guide and assist clinicians in surgical indication.