Clinical value of decompressive craniectomy

Efficacy of decompressive craniectomy: A retrospective case series study with 321 patients and an update on controversies

Decompressive craniectomy (DC) is considered a cornerstone in the management of refractory intracranial hypertension. For decades, DC was known as an occasionally lifesaving procedure; however, it was associated with numerous severe complications. The present study is a single-center retrospective case series study on with 321 patients who underwent DC between January, 2010 and December, 2020. All patients were divided into four groups as follows: Group A included patients who suffered from a space-occupying middle cerebral artery (MCA) ischemic event; group B included individuals who developed intracerebral hemorrhage; group C included patients admitted for traumatic brain injury; and group D included patients with other neurosurgical entities that underwent DC, such as subarachnoid hemorrhage, tumors, brain abscess and cerebral ventricular sinus thrombosis events. The present study enrolled a total of 321 patients who underwent DC. Group A included 52 out of the 321 (16.1%) patients, group B included 51 (15.8%) patients, group C included 164 (51.0%) patients, and group D included 54 (16.8%) patients. Of the 321 patients, 235 (73.2%) were males, and the median age was 53.7 years. Multivariate analysis revealed that only the group A parameter was an independent factor associated with a Glasgow outcome scale score >2 during follow-up (P<0.05). On the whole, the results of the present study suggest that among patients who underwent DC with different neurological entities, those who had experienced MCA events had more favorable outcomes.

Functional Outcome and Mortality Predictors in Patients with Cerebral Ischemic Infarction After Decompressive Craniectomy: Cross-Sectional Study

OBJECTIVE

Surgeons commonly perform Decompressive craniectomy (DC) to manage patients with cerebral ischemic infarction. However, there are conflicting data on the long-term functional outcomes following DC. Therefore, this study aims to determine the functional outcome of patients with cerebral ischemic infarction after DC.

METHODS

This prospective and retrospective cross-sectional study included 148 patients with cerebral ischemic infarction who underwent DC at Ghaem Hospital, Mashhad, Iran, from March 2011 to March 2021. The Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) assesses disability in these patients and determines the recovery and degree of long-term functional outcomes. Demographic and clinical data were extracted and recorded in a researcher-made questionnaire.

RESULTS

In summary, the follow-up revealed a survival rate of 39.2% among patients with ischemic stroke. The comparison of the mean infarct volume in patients with various mRS scores showed that the mean infarct volume was significantly higher in patients with unfavorable functional outcomes, based on mRS scores at discharge (P = 0.05), 3 months mRS (P < 0.01), and mRS score at final follow-up (P = 0.01). Final mortality was higher in patients with higher mRS scores at discharge, after 3 months, and final follow-up (P < 0.01). Older age and infarction volume can predict mRS and mortality in patients with ischemic stroke (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study showed that mortality and mRS scores at various times are associated with infarction volume and older age in patients with ischemic stroke.

Bilateral Frontoparietotemporal Craniectomy for Traumatic Brain Injury: A Case Report

There is no conclusive agreement on the optimal approach to managing severe traumatic brain injury. This article details the methodology and outcomes of bilateral frontoparietotemporal decompression surgery performed on a three-year-old patient with severe traumatic brain injury. As the patient had fixed dilated pupils, GCS (Glasgow coma scale) 4, and marked edema in the frontal and parietal regions, the Kjellberg approach was modified, and decompression including part of the parietal bone was performed. The patient was intubated and sedated in the intensive care unit for one week postoperatively. After extubation, the patient had reactive pupils and a GCS of 13. The patient underwent a cranioplasty two months after the trauma, combining the bone grafts placed in the abdomen. The patient was followed for three days after cranioplasty and discharged with a GCS:15 and intact motor examination.

Decompressive Craniectomy for the Treatment of Severe Diffuse Traumatic Brain Injury: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background  Severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) is one of the leading public health problems across the world. TBI is associated with high economic costs to the healthcare system specially in developing countries. Decompressive craniectomy is a procedure in which an area of the skull is removed to increase the volume of intracranial compartment. There are various techniques of decompressive craniectomy used that include subtemporal and circular decompression, and unilateral or bilateral frontotemporoparietal decompression. Objective  The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of decompressive craniectomy for the management of severe TBI versus conservative management alone at the Department of Neurosurgery, Abbasi Shaheed Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan. Methods  The study (randomized controlled trial) was conducted from February 1, 2014, till June 30, 2017. Results  A total of 136 patients were included after following the inclusion criteria. They were randomly assigned to two groups, making it 68 patients in each study group. There were 89 males and 47 females. All the patients received standard care recommended by the Brain Trauma Foundation. The mortality rate observed at 6 months in decompressive craniectomy was 22.05%, while among conservative management group, it was 45.58%. Difference in mortality of both groups at 6 months was significant. Total 61.76% (42) of patients from decompressive craniectomy group had a favorable outcome (Glasgow outcome scale: 4-5) at 6 months. While among conservative management group, total 35.29% (24) had a favorable outcome (Glasgow outcome scale: 4-5). Difference in Glasgow outcome scale at 6 months of both groups was significant. Conclusion  In conclusion, decompressive craniectomy is simple, safe, and better than conservative management alone.

Comparative effectiveness of different surgical procedures for traumatic acute epidural haematoma: study protocol for Prospective, Observational Real-world Treatments of AEDH in Large-scale Surgical Cases (PORTALS-AEDH)

INTRODUCTION

Controversy and variation exist in surgical management for acute epidural haematoma (AEDH). Although craniotomy for AEDH is conventionally employed, no specific evaluation on the necessity of decompressive craniectomy (DC) followed by AEDH evacuation has been performed.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a multicentre prospective, phase III observational study that evaluates different surgical managements for the AEDH. Patients of both genders, aged 18-65 years, presenting to the emergency room with a clinical and radiological diagnosis of AEDH, complying with other inclusion and exclusion criteria, are enrolled. Clinical information, including diagnosis of AEDH, radiological information, treatment procedures and follow-up data of 1, 3 and 6 months post-injury, is collected on 2000 eligible patients among 263 hospitals in China. Recruitment for the study started in April 2021, and inclusion will be continued until the sample size is obtained, expected is an inclusion period of 24 months. The interventions of concern are surgical treatments for AEDH, including craniotomy and DC. The primary outcome is the Glasgow Outcome Score-Extended 6 months post-injury. Secondary outcomes include the incidence of postoperative cerebral infarction, the incidence of additional craniocerebral surgery and other evaluation indicators within 6 months post-injury.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study protocol has been approved by the ethics committee and institutional review board of Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University. All study investigators strictly follow the Declaration of Helsinki and Human Biomedical Research Ethical Issues. Signed written informed consent will be obtained from all enrolled patients. The trial results will be disseminated through academic conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04229966.

Changing epidemiology of traumatic brain injury among the working-aged in Finland: Admissions and neurosurgical operations

BACKGROUND

Recent studies from Finland have highlighted an increase in the incidence of traumatic brain injuries (TBI) in older age groups and high overall mortality. We performed a comprehensive study on the changing epidemiology of TBI focusing on the acute events in the Finnish working-age population.

METHODS

Nationwide databases were searched for all emergency ward admissions with a TBI diagnosis for persons of 16-69 years of age during 2004-2018.

RESULTS

In the Finnish working-age population, there were 52,487,099 person-years, 38,810 TBI-related hospital admissions, 4664 acute neurosurgical operations (ANO), and 2247 cases of in-hospital mortality (IHM). The TBI-related hospital admission incidence was 94/100,000 person-years in men, 44/100,000 in women, and 69/100,000 overall. The incidence rate of admissions increased in women, while in men and overall, the rate decreased. The incidence rate increased in the group of 60-69 years in both genders. Lowest incidence rates were observed in the age group of 30-39 years. Occurrence risk for TBI admission was higher in men in all age groups. Trends of ANOs decreased overall, while decompressive craniectomy was the only operation type in which a rise in incidence was found. Evacuation of acute subdural hematoma was the most common ANO. Mean length of stay and IHM rate halved during the study years.

CONCLUSIONS

In Finland, the epidemiology of acute working-aged TBI has significantly changed. The rates of admission incidences, ANOs, and IHM nowadays represent the lower end of the range of these acute events reported in the western world.

Prospective Randomized Evaluation of Decompressive Ipsilateral Craniectomy for Traumatic Acute Epidural Hematoma (PREDICT-AEDH): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

The expeditious surgical evacuation of acute epidural hematoma (AEDH) is an attainable gold standard and is often expected to have a good clinical outcome for patients with surgical indications. However, controversy exists on the optimal surgical options for AEDH, especially for patients with brain herniation. Neurosurgeons are confronted with the decision to evacuate the hematoma with decompressive craniectomy (DC) or craniotomy.

Methods/design

Patients of both sexes, age between 18 and 65 years, who presented to the emergency room with a clinical and radiological diagnosis of AEDH with herniation, were assessed against the inclusion and exclusion criteria to be enrolled in the study. Clinical and radiological information, including diagnosis of AEDH, treatment procedures, and follow-up data at 1, 3, and 6 months after injury, was collected from 120 eligible patients in 51 centers. The patients were randomized into groups of DC versus craniotomy in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was the Glasgow Outcome Score-Extended (GOSE) at 6 months post-injury. Secondary outcomes included incidence of postoperative cerebral infarction, incidence of additional craniocerebral surgery, and other evaluation indicators within 6 months post-injury.

Discussion

This study is expected to support neurosurgeons in their decision to evacuate the epidural hematoma with or without a DC, especially in patients with brain herniation, and provide additional evidence to improve the knowledge in clinical practice.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.govNCT 04261673. Registered on 04 February 2020

Balancing the short-term benefits and long-term outcomes of decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury

Introduction: The role of decompressive craniectomy in the management of neurological emergencies remains controversial. There is evidence available that it can reduce intracranial pressure, but it will not reverse the effects of the pathology that precipitated the neurological crisis, so there has always been concern that any reduction in mortality will result in an increase in the number of survivors with severe disability.Areas covered: The results of recent randomised controlled trials investigating the efficacy of the procedure are analyzed in order to determine the degree to which the short-term goals of reducing mortality and the long-term goals of a good functional outcome are achieved.Expert opinion: Given the results of the trials, there needs to be a change in the clinical decision-making paradigm such that decompression is reserved for patients who develop intractable intracranial hypertension and who are thought unlikely to survive without surgical intervention. In these circumstances, a more patient-centered discussion is required regarding the possibility and acceptability or otherwise of survival with severely impaired neurocognitive function.

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

BACKGROUND

High intracranial pressure (ICP) is the most frequent cause of death and disability after severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). It is usually treated with general maneuvers (normothermia, sedation, etc.) and a set of first-line therapeutic measures (moderate hypocapnia, mannitol, etc.). When these measures fail, second-line therapies are initiated, which include: barbiturates, hyperventilation, moderate hypothermia, or removal of a variable amount of skull bone (secondary decompressive craniectomy).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of secondary decompressive craniectomy (DC) on outcomes of patients with severe TBI in whom conventional medical therapeutic measures have failed to control raised ICP.

SEARCH METHODS

The most recent search was run on 8 December 2019. We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialised Register, CENTRAL (Cochrane Library), Ovid MEDLINE(R), Ovid MEDLINE(R) In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE(R) Daily and Ovid OLDMEDLINE(R), Embase Classic + Embase (OvidSP) and ISI Web of Science (SCI-EXPANDED & CPCI-S). We also searched trials registries and contacted experts.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized studies assessing patients over the age of 12 months with severe TBI who either underwent DC to control ICP refractory to conventional medical treatments or received standard care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We selected potentially relevant studies from the search results, and obtained study reports. Two review authors independently extracted data from included studies and assessed risk of bias. We used a random-effects model for meta-analysis. We rated the quality of the evidence according to the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three trials (590 participants). One single-site trial included 27 children; another multicenter trial (three countries) recruited 155 adults, the third trial was conducted in 24 countries, and recruited 408 adolescents and adults. Each study compared DC combined with standard care (this could include induced barbiturate coma or cooling of the brain, or both). All trials measured outcomes up to six months after injury; one also measured outcomes at 12 and 24 months (the latter data remain unpublished). All trials were at a high risk of bias for the criterion of performance bias, as neither participants nor personnel could be blinded to these interventions. The pediatric trial was at a high risk of selection bias and stopped early; another trial was at risk of bias because of atypical inclusion criteria and a change to the primary outcome after it had started. Mortality: pooled results for three studies provided moderate quality evidence that risk of death at six months was slightly reduced with DC (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.01; 3 studies, 571 participants; I2 = 38%; moderate-quality evidence), and one study also showed a clear reduction in risk of death at 12 months (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.76; 1 study, 373 participants; high-quality evidence). Neurological outcome: conscious of controversy around the traditional dichotomization of the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) scale, we chose to present results in three ways, in order to contextualize factors relevant to clinical/patient decision-making. First, we present results of death in combination with vegetative status, versus other outcomes. Two studies reported results at six months for 544 participants. One employed a lower ICP threshold than the other studies, and showed an increase in the risk of death/vegetative state for the DC group. The other study used a more conventional ICP threshold, and results favoured the DC group (15.7% absolute risk reduction (ARR) (95% CI 6% to 25%). The number needed to treat for one beneficial outcome (NNTB) (i.e. to avoid death or vegetative status) was seven. The pooled result for DC compared with standard care showed no clear benefit for either group (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.46 to 2.13; 2 studies, 544 participants; I2 = 86%; low-quality evidence). One study reported data for this outcome at 12 months, when the risk for death or vegetative state was clearly reduced by DC compared with medical treatment (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.86; 1 study, 373 participants; high-quality evidence). Second, we assessed the risk of an 'unfavorable outcome' evaluated on a non-traditional dichotomized GOS-Extended scale (GOS-E), that is, grouping the category 'upper severe disability' into the 'good outcome' grouping. Data were available for two studies (n = 571). Pooling indicated little difference between DC and standard care regarding the risk of an unfavorable outcome at six months following injury (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.63; 544 participants); heterogeneity was high, with an I2 value of 82%. One trial reported data at 12 months and indicated a clear benefit of DC (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.95; 373 participants). Third, we assessed the risk of an 'unfavorable outcome' using the (traditional) dichotomized GOS/GOS-E cutoff into 'favorable' versus 'unfavorable' results. There was little difference between DC and standard care at six months (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.40; 3 studies, 571 participants; low-quality evidence), and heterogeneity was high (I2 = 78%). At 12 months one trial suggested a similar finding (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.09; 1 study, 373 participants; high-quality evidence). With regard to ICP reduction, pooled results for two studies provided moderate quality evidence that DC was superior to standard care for reducing ICP within 48 hours (MD -4.66 mmHg, 95% CI -6.86 to -2.45; 2 studies, 182 participants; I2 = 0%). Data from the third study were consistent with these, but could not be pooled. Data on adverse events are difficult to interpret, as mortality and complications are high, and it can be difficult to distinguish between treatment-related adverse events and the natural evolution of the condition. In general, there was low-quality evidence that surgical patients experienced a higher risk of adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Decompressive craniectomy holds promise of reduced mortality, but the effects of long-term neurological outcome remain controversial, and involve an examination of the priorities of participants and their families. Future research should focus on identifying clinical and neuroimaging characteristics to identify those patients who would survive with an acceptable quality of life; the best timing for DC; the most appropriate surgical techniques; and whether some synergistic treatments used with DC might improve patient outcomes.

The History of Decompressive Craniectomy in Traumatic Brain Injury

Decompressive craniectomy consists of removal of piece of bone of the skull in order to reduce intracranial pressure. It is an age-old procedure, taking ancient roots from the Egyptians and Romans, passing through the experience of Berengario da Carpi, until Theodore Kocher, who was the first to systematically describe this procedure in traumatic brain injury (TBI). In the last century, many neurosurgeons have reported their experience, using different techniques of decompressive craniectomy following head trauma, with conflicting results. It is thanks to the successes and failures reported by these authors that we are now able to better understand the pathophysiology of brain swelling in head trauma and the role of decompressive craniectomy in mitigating intracranial hypertension and its impact on clinical outcome. Following a historical description, we will describe the steps that led to the conception of the recent randomized clinical trials, which have taught us that decompressive craniectomy is still a last-tier measure, and decisions to recommend it should been made not only according to clinical indications but also after consideration of patients' preferences and quality of life expectations.

Complications of Decompressive Craniectomy

Decompressive craniectomy (DC) has become the definitive surgical procedure to manage medically intractable rise in intracranial pressure due to stroke and traumatic brain injury. With incoming evidence from recent multi-centric randomized controlled trials to support its use, we could expect a significant rise in the number of patients who undergo this procedure. Although one would argue that the procedure reduces mortality only at the expense of increasing the proportion of the severely disabled, what is not contested is that patients face the risk of a large number of complications after the operation and that can further compromise the quality of life. Decompressive craniectomy (DC), which is designed to overcome the space constraints of the Monro Kellie doctrine, perturbs the cerebral blood, and CSF flow dynamics. Resultant complications occur days to months after the surgical procedure in a time pattern that can be anticipated with advantage in managing them. New or expanding hematomas that occur within the first few days can be life-threatening and we recommend CT scans at 24 and 48 h postoperatively to detect them. Surgeons should also be mindful of the myriad manifestations of peculiar complications like the syndrome of the trephined and neurological deterioration due to paradoxical herniation which may occur many months after the decompression. A sufficiently large frontotemporoparietal craniectomy, 15 cm in diameter, increases the effectiveness of the procedure and reduces chances of external cerebral herniation. An early cranioplasty, as soon as the brain is lax, appears to be a reasonable choice to mitigate many of the late complications. Complications, their causes, consequences, and measures to manage them are described in this chapter.

Prognostic value of changes in brain tissue oxygen pressure before and after decompressive craniectomy following severe traumatic brain injury

OBJECTIVE In severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), the effects of decompressive craniectomy (DC) on brain tissue oxygen pressure (PbtO2) and outcome are unclear. The authors aimed to investigate whether changes in PbtO2 after DC could be used as an independent prognostic factor. METHODS The authors conducted a retrospective, observational study at 2 university hospital ICUs. The study included 42 patients who were admitted with isolated moderate or severe TBI and underwent intracranial pressure (ICP) and PbtO2 monitoring before and after DC. The indication for DC was an ICP higher than 25 mm Hg refractory to first-tier medical treatment. Patients who underwent primary DC for mass lesion evacuation were excluded. However, patients were included who had undergone previous surgery as long as it was not a craniectomy. ICP/PbtO2 monitoring probes were located in an apparently normal area of the most damaged hemisphere based on cranial CT scanning findings. PbtO2 values were routinely recorded hourly before and after DC, but for comparisons the authors used the first PbtO2 value on ICU admission and the number of hours with PbtO2 < 15 mm Hg before DC, as well as the mean PbtO2 every 6 hours during 24 hours pre- and post-DC. The end point of the study was the 6-month Glasgow Outcome Scale; a score of 4 or 5 was considered a favorable outcome, whereas a score of 1-3 was considered an unfavorable outcome. RESULTS Of the 42 patients included, 26 underwent unilateral DC and 16 bilateral DC. The median Glasgow Coma Scale score at the scene of the accident or at the initial hospital before the patient was transferred to one of the 2 ICUs was 7 (interquartile range [IQR] 4-14). The median time from admission to DC was 49 hours (IQR 7-301 hours). Before DC, the median ICP and PbtO2 at 6 hours were 35 mm Hg (IQR 28-51 mm Hg) and 11.4 mm Hg (IQR 3-26 mm Hg), respectively. In patients with favorable outcome, PbtO2 at ICU admission was higher and the percentage of time that pre-DC PbtO2 was < 15 mm Hg was lower (19 ± 4.5 mm Hg and 18.25% ± 21.9%, respectively; n = 28) than in those with unfavorable outcome (12.8 ± 5.2 mm Hg [p < 0.001] and 59.58% ± 38.8% [p < 0.001], respectively; n = 14). There were no significant differences in outcomes according to the mean PbtO2 values only during the last 12 hours before DC, the hours of refractory intracranial hypertension, the timing of DC from admission, or the presence/absence of previous surgery. In contrast, there were significant differences in PbtO2 values during the 12- to 24-hour period before DC. In most patients, PbtO2 increased during the 24 hours after DC but these changes were more pronounced in patients with favorable outcome than in those with unfavorable outcome (28.6 ± 8.5 mm Hg vs 17.2 ± 5.9 mm Hg, p < 0.0001; respectively). The areas under the curve for the mean PbtO2 values at 12 and 24 hours after DC were 0.878 (95% CI 0.75-1, p < 0.0001) and 0.865 (95% CI 0.73-1, p < 0.0001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS The authors' findings suggest that changes in PbtO2 before and after DC, measured with probes in healthy-appearing areas of the most damaged hemisphere, have independent prognostic value for the 6-month outcome in TBI patients.

Factors Affecting Functional Outcome after Decompressive Craniectomy Performed for Traumatic Brain Injury: A Retrospective, Cross-sectional Study

Background:

Factors affecting functional outcome after decompressive craniectomy (DC) performed for traumatic brain injury (TBI) remain poorly understood.

Methods:

We conducted a retrospective study of all patients who underwent primary DC for TBI at our hospital between 2010 and 2014. Multivariate regression analyses were used to determine the predictors of functional outcome and overall survival.

Results:

A total of 98 patients with severe (n = 81, 82.6%) or moderate (n = 17, 17.4%) TBI underwent primary DC and were included in this study. The 30-day and overall mortality rates were 15.3% and 25.5%, respectively. At a median follow-up of 90 (interquartile range (IQR): 38–180) days, median Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) and Glasgow outcome scale-extended (GOSE) scores were 50 (IQR: 20–70) and 5 (IQR: 3–7), respectively. Young age and severe TBI were predictors of mortality. Glasgow coma scale (GCS) score on discharge was a strong predictor of KPS and GOSE scores.

Conclusion:

Primary DC afforded an acceptable functional outcome (GOSE score ≥5) in 45.9% of patients. Young age and lower GCS at presentation were associated with worse survival. GCS score on discharge was a strong predictor of functional outcome.

Indicators of Survival and Favorable Functional Outcomes after Decompressive Craniectomy: A Multi-Institutional Retrospective Study

The role of decompressive craniectomy (DC) for severe traumatic brain injury (STBI) remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to identify factors that are indicators of survival and improved functional outcome in patients who undergo DC for STBI. A retrospective review of STBI patients who underwent DC was performed at four trauma centers during a 45-month period. Data collected included age, gender, mechanism of injury, Injury Severity Score (ISS), admission Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS), time from admission to DC, mortality, and extended Glasgow Outcome Score before discharge. Sixty-nine STBI patients were treated with DC during the study period. A higher initial GCS, lower ISS, and longer time to DC were all statistically significant for improved survival after DC. A younger age, higher initial GCS, and lower ISS were all statistically significant for a favorable functional outcome after DC. Patients with a higher initial GCS and lower ISS are more likely to survive DC and have a favorable functional outcome, whereas a longer time to DC was indicative of improved survival after DC.

Decompressive Craniectomy in Traumatic Brain Injury: A Review Article

The importance of treating traumatic brain injury (TBI) is well known worldwide. Although many studies have been conducted in this topic, there is still much uncertainty about the effectiveness of surgical treatment in TBI. Recently, good randomized controlled trial (RCT) papers about the effectiveness of decompressive craniectomy (DC) in TBI has been published. In this article, we will review the overall contents of the DC (historical base, surgical technic, rationale, complications) and the results of the recently published RCT paper.

Decompressive craniectomy in acute brain injury

Decompressive surgery to reduce pressure under the skull varies from a burrhole, bone flap to removal of a large skull segment. Decompressive craniectomy is the removal of a large enough segment of skull to reduce refractory intracranial pressure and to maintain cerebral compliance for the purpose of preventing neurologic deterioration. Decompressive hemicraniectomy and bifrontal craniectomy are the most commonly performed procedures. Bifrontal craniectomy is most often utilized with generalized cerebral edema in the absence of a focal mass lesion and when there are bilateral frontal contusions. Decompressive hemicraniectomy is most commonly considered for malignant middle cerebral artery infarcts. The ethical predicament of deciding to go ahead with a major neurosurgical procedure with the purpose of avoiding brain death from displacement, but resulting in prolonged severe disability in many, are addressed. This chapter describes indications, surgical techniques, and complications. It reviews results of recent clinical trials and provides a reasonable assessment for practice.

Osteointegration in cranial bone reconstruction: a goal to achieve

BACKGROUND

The number of cranioplasty procedures is steadily increasing, mainly due to growing indications for decompressive procedures following trauma, tumor or malformations. Although autologous bone is still considered the gold standard for bone replacement in skull, there is an urgent need for synthetic porous implants able to guide bone regeneration and stable reconstruction of the defect. In this respect, hydroxyapatite scaffolds with highly porous architecture are very promising materials, due to the excellent biocompatibility and intrinsic osteogenic and osteoconductive properties that enable deep bone penetration in the scaffold and excellent osteointegration. Osteointegration is here highlighted as a key aspect for the early recovery of bone-like biomechanical performance, for which custom-made porous hydroxyapatite scaffolds play a major role. There are still very few cases documenting the clinical performance of porous scaffolds following cranioplasty.

METHODS

This paper reports 2 clinical cases where large cranial defects were repaired by the aid of porous hydroxyapatite scaffolds with customized shapes and 3D profiles (Fin-Ceramica, Faenza, Italy).

RESULTS

In the long term (i.e., after 2 years), these scaffolds yielded extensive osteointegration through formation and penetration of new organized bone.

CONCLUSIONS

These results confirm that porous hydroxyapatite scaffolds, uniquely possessing chemico-physical and morphological/mechanical properties very close to those of bone, can be considered as a tool to provide effective bone regeneration in large cranial bone defects. Moreover, they may potentially prevent most of the postsurgical drawbacks related to the use of metal or plastic implants.

The value of intraoperative intracranial pressure monitoring for predicting re-operation using salvage decompressive craniectomy after craniotomy in patients with traumatic mass lesions

BACKGROUND

The risk factors of predicting the need for postoperative decompressive craniectomy due to intracranial hypertension after primary craniotomy remain unclear. This study aimed to investigate the value of intraoperative intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring in predicting re-operation using salvage decompressive craniectomy (SDC).

METHODS

From January 2008 to October 2014, we retrospectively reviewed 284 patients with severe traumatic brain injury (STBI) who underwent craniotomy for mass lesion evacuation without intraoperative brain swelling. Intraoperative ICP was documented at the time of initial craniotomy and then again after the dura was sutured. SDC was used when postoperative ICP was continually higher than 25 mmHg for 1 h without a downward trend. Univariate and multivariate analyses were applied to both initial demographic and radiographic features to identify risk factors of SDC requirement.

RESULTS

Of 284, 41 (14.4%) patients who underwent SDC had a higher Initial ICP than those who didn't (38.1 ± 9.2 vs. 29.3 ± 8.1 mmHg, P < 0.001), but there was no difference in ICP after the dura was sutured. The factors which have significant effects on SDC are higher initial ICP [odds ratio (OR): 1.100, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.052-1.151, P < 0.001], older age (OR: 1.039, 95% CI: 1.002-1.077, P = 0.039), combined lesions (OR: 3.329, 95% CI: 1.199-9.244, P = 0.021) and early hypotension (OR: 2.524, 95% CI: 1.107-5.756, P = 0.028). The area under the curve of multivariate regression model was 0.771.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of re-operation using SDC after craniotomy was 14.4%. The independent risk factors of SDC requirement are initial ICP, age, early hypotension and combined lesions.

The role of decompressive craniectomy in children with severe traumatic brain injury

OBJECTIVE

Severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) remains the leading cause of death in children. The present study analyses the outcome of children after severe TBI treated by decompressive craniectomy (DC) due to elevated intracranial pressure (ICP) in a single centre.

METHODS

Fifty-six consecutive children (age < 16 years) were treated for severe TBI at our institution between 2001 and 2011. For study purposes, children with severe generalized traumatic brain swelling without concomitant mass lesion were further analysed. Descriptive statistics were used to report clinical conditions as well as outcome measurements after conservative treatment only in comparison to secondary decompressive craniectomy.

RESULTS

Of 56 children, a total of eight children presented with generalized and progressive traumatic brain swelling and impending brain herniation. Four children were treated conservatively following standardized local protocol for anti-oedematous management, with ICP amenable to intensified therapy. Four children required decompressive surgery due to progressive oedema refractory to intensified conservative management. Children receiving secondary DC had a longer stay in the intensive care unit as well as a longer average time of assisted ventilation compared to children treated conservatively. Concomitant injuries were more severe in the DC subgroup. Yet, Glasgow Outcome Scale was equally distributed in both groups.

CONCLUSION

In children with refractory ICP conditions due to severe TBI, decompressive surgery might lead to a similar favourable outcome compared to children in whom ICP can be controlled only by conservative management. Timing of surgery depends on the neurological deterioration of the patients and a continuous ICP monitoring.

The effect of craniectomy size on mortality, outcome, and complications after decompressive craniectomy at a rural trauma center

Introduction:

Decompressive craniectomy (DC) has increasing support with current studies suggesting an improvement in both survival rates and outcomes with this intervention. However, questions surround this procedure; specifically, no evidence has indicated the optimal craniectomy size. Larger craniectomy is thought to better decrease intracranial pressure, but with a possible increase in complication rates. Our hypothesis is that a larger craniectomy may improve mortality and outcome, but may increase complication rates.

Materials and Methods:

A retrospective observational therapeutic study was undertaken to determine if craniectomy size is related to complication rates, mortality, or outcome. Our institution's Trauma Registry was searched for patients undergoing DC. Craniectomy size was measured by antero-posterior (AP) diameter. Mortality, outcome (through admission and discharge Glasgow Coma Score and Glasgow Outcome Scale), and complications (such as re-bleeding, re-operation, hygroma, hydrocephalus, infection, and syndrome of the trephined) were noted. Complications, mortality, and outcome were then compared to craniectomy size, to determine if any relation existed to support our hypothesis.

Results:

20 patients met criteria for inclusion in this study. Craniectomy size as measured by AP diameter was correlated with a statistically significant improvement in mortality within the group. All patients with a craniectomy size less than 10 cm died. However, outcome was not significantly related to craniectomy size in the group. Similarly, complication rates did not differ significantly compared to craniectomy size.

Discussion:

This study provides Level 3 evidence that craniectomy size may be significantly related to improved mortality within our group, supporting our initial hypothesis; however, no significant improvement in outcome was seen. Similarly, in contrast to our hypothesis, complication rates did not significantly correlate with craniectomy size.

Decompressive craniectomy in traumatic brain injury after the DECRA trial. Where do we stand?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The results of the multicentre, randomized, controlled trial to test the effectiveness of decompressive craniectomy in adults with traumatic brain injury and high intracranial pressure (Decompressive Craniectomy, DECRA) were published in 2011. DECRA concluded that decompressive craniectomy decreased intracranial pressure (ICP) but was associated with more unfavourable outcomes. Our review aims to put the DECRA trial into context, comment on its findings and discuss whether we should include decompressive craniectomy in our clinical armamentarium.

RECENT FINDINGS

The key message that DECRA conveys is that decompressive craniectomy significantly lowers ICP and shortens the length of the stay in the ICU. However, neither mortality nor unfavourable outcome was reduced when adjusting the significant baseline covariates.

SUMMARY

The claim that decompressive craniectomy increases unfavourable outcome is overstated and not supported by the data presented in DECRA. We believe it premature to change clinical practice. Given the dismal outcome in these patients, it is reasonable to include this technique as a last resort in any type of protocol-driven management when conventional therapeutic measures have failed to control ICP, the presence of operable masses has been ruled out and the patient may still have a chance of a functional outcome. The main lesson to be learned from this study is that an upper threshold for ICP must be used as a cut-off for selecting decompressive craniectomy candidates.

The influence of clinical evidence on surgical practice

Given the considerable interest in the use of evidence-based medicine to guide clinical practice, it is surprising that the results of a recent randomized controlled trial have been met with such a limited response. The DECompressive CRAniectomy study investigators have recently published the results of a landmark trial in neurosurgery, comparing early decompressive craniectomy with standard medical therapy in patients who developed intracranial hypertension after diffuse closed traumatic brain injury (TBI). This is the first ever randomized controlled trial investigating the surgical management of adult patients with severe TBI. The trial clearly demonstrated that early decompression did not provide clinical benefit; however, rather than having a significant impact on clinical practice, it has been almost uniformly criticized. While there were some problems with randomization and crossover, we feel that the trial has been somewhat misinterpreted and in this article we address some of the key issues.

Decompressive craniectomy: past, present and future

Decompressive craniectomy (DC)--a surgical procedure that involves removal of part of the skull to accommodate brain swelling--has been used for many years in the management of patients with brain oedema and/or intracranial hypertension, but its place in contemporary practice remains controversial. Results from a recent trial showed that early (neuroprotective) DC was not superior to medical management in patients with diffuse traumatic brain injury. An ongoing trial is investigating the clinical and cost effectiveness of secondary DC as a last-tier therapy for post-traumatic refractory intracranial hypertension. With regard to ischaemic stroke (malignant middle cerebral artery infarction), a recent Cochrane review concluded that DC improves survival compared with medical management, but that a higher proportion of DC survivors experience moderately severe or severe disability. Although many patients have a good outcome, the issue of DC-related disability raises important ethical issues. As DC and subsequent cranioplasty are associated with a number of complications, indiscriminate use of this surgery is not appropriate. Here, we review the evidence and present considerations regarding surgical technique, ethics and cost-effectiveness of DC. Prospective clinical trials and cohort studies are essential to enable optimization of patient care and outcomes.

Autologous bone flap versus hydroxyapatite prosthesis in first intention in secondary cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy: a French medico-economical study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Decompressive craniectomy is the most common justification for cranioplasty. A medico-economial study based on the effective cost of the hydroxyapatite prosthesis, the percentage of autologous bone graft's loss due to bacterial contamination and the healthcare reimbursment, will allow us to define the best strategy in term of Healthcare economy management for the cranioplasties. A comparison was made between the two groups of patients, autologous bone flap versus custom-made prosthesis in first intention, based on the clinical experience of our department of neurosurgery.

RESULTS

No differences was shown between the two groups of patients, in terms of lenght of in-hospital stay and population's characteristics or medical codification. The mean cost of a cranioplasty using the autologous bone graft in first intention was €4045, while the use of hydroxyapatite prosthesis led to a cost of €8000 per cranioplasty.

CONCLUSION

In term of Healthcare expenses, autologous bone flap should be used in first intention for cranioplasties, unless the flap is contaminated or in specific indications, when the 3D custom-made hydroxyapatite prosthesis should be privilegied.

Use of "custom made" porous hydroxyapatite implants for cranioplasty: postoperative analysis of complications in 1549 patients

Background:

Cranioplasty is a surgical intervention aimed at reestablishing the integrity of skull defects, and should be considered the conclusion of a surgical act that began with bone flap removal. Autologous bone is still considered the treatment of choice for cranioplasty. An alternative choice is bioceramic porous hydroxyapatite (HA) as it is one of the materials that meets and comes closest to the biomimetic characteristics of bone.

Methods:

The authors analyzed the clinical charts, compiled by the neurosurgeon, of all patients treated with custom-made porous HA devices (Custom Bone Service Fin-Ceramica, Faenza) from which epidemiological and pathological data as well as material-related complications were extrapolated.

Results:

From November 1997 to December 2010, 1549 patients underwent cranioplasty with the implantation of 1608 custom-made porous HA devices. HA was used in 53.8% of patients for decompressive craniectomy after trauma or intracranial hemorrhage, while the remaining cases were for treated for comminuted fracture, cutaneous or osseous resection, cranial malformation, autologous bone reabsorption or infection or rejection of previously implanted material. The incidence of adverse events in patients treated for cranioplasty, as first line treatment was 4.78% (56 events/1171 patients), and 5.02%, (19 events/378 patients) at second line.

Conclusion:

This study demonstrates that HA is a safe and effective material, is well tolerated in both adult and pediatric patients, and meets the requirements necessary to repair craniolacunia.

Different sham procedures for rats in traumatic brain injury experiments induce corresponding increases in levels of trauma markers

BACKGROUND

In traumatic brain injury animal models, sham or naïve control groups are often used for the analysis of injured animals; however, the existence and/or significance of differences in the control groups has yet to be studied. In addition, recent controversies regarding the decompressive craniectomy trial in which decompressive craniectomies in patients with severe traumatic brain injury and refractory increased intracranial pressure remains unsettled. Although the report demonstrated that the procedure may result in less favorable long-term outcomes despite the decrease in intracranial pressure and shorter length of intensive care unit stay, the study has been criticized, and the debate is still inconclusive partly because of a lack of mechanistic explanation. We have recently discovered epithelial and endothelial tyrosine kinase (Etk) to exhibit upregulation after traumatic neural injury and will compare the effects of craniectomy procedure with those of other procedures inducing different levels of severity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Four groups of rats receiving different procedures (controlled cortical impact, craniectomy, bicortical drilling, and unicortical drilling [UD]) were compared. Polymerase chain reaction, Western blot analysis, and immunoflorescence staining of Etk, S100, and glial fibrillary acidic protein levels were used to analyze the results and compare the different groups.

RESULTS

Etk upregulation was statistically significant between craniectomy and UD groups. The level of change for glial fibrillary acidic protein and S100 was only significant when cortex was impacted.

CONCLUSIONS

UD may be preferable as a sham control procedure over craniectomy or bicortical drilling. Increases in the expression of Etk in the craniectomy group suggest a possible mechanism by which unfavorable outcome occurs in patients receiving craniectomy procedures.

What can be learned from the DECRA study

BACKGROUND

There has been a resurgence of interest in the use of decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). Numerous studies have shown that the procedure can consistently reduce intracranial pressure (ICP), and a significant number of patients achieve a good long-term functional recovery. However, there has been debate regarding clinical indications and patient selection.

METHODS

The DECRA (Decompressive Craniectomy in Patients with Severe Traumatic Brain Injury) study compared patients who underwent early decompressive craniectomy for diffuse TBI with patients who received standard medical therapy. Of patients, 70% in the craniectomy group had an unfavourable outcome versus 51% in the standard care group (odds ratio 2.21 [95% confidence interval 1.14-4.26]; P=0.02). Based on these results, the authors concluded that decompressive craniectomy was associated with more unfavorable outcomes and that by adopting standard medical therapy rather than surgical decompression the health care system would save millions of dollars. These conclusions are not really supported by closer examination of the basic data. There were problems with randomization such that the patients in the surgical arm appeared to have sustained a more severe primary TBI, the ICP threshold of >20 mm Hg for >15 minutes did not reflect clinical practice, and there was a high crossover rate from the standard care arm to the surgical arm. Because of these problems, the DECRA trial has received a great deal of criticism, and some authorities have claimed that the results should have no influence on clinical practice. This claim is perhaps unfair, and an alternative interpretation is offered.

RESULTS

Overall, the results of the DECRA study showed that a relatively transient and mild increase in ICP (>20 mm Hg for 15 minutes as recruitment criterion) does not imply that there is significant ongoing secondary brain injury, and any potential improvement obtained by surgical decompression may well be offset by surgical morbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

The role of decompressive craniectomy when ICP continues to increase ≥20 mm Hg remains to be established. The ongoing RESCUEicp (Randomised Evaluation of Surgery with Craniectomy for Uncontrollable Elevation of Intra-Cranial Pressure) study hopes to address this issue.

Increased strain levels and water content in brain tissue after decompressive craniotomy

BACKGROUND

At present there is a debate on the effectiveness of the decompressive craniotomy (DC). Stretching of axons was speculated to contribute to the unfavourable outcome for the patients. The quantification of strain level could provide more insight into the potential damage to the axons. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the strain level and water content (WC) of the brain tissue for both the pre- and post-craniotomy period.

METHODS

The stretching of brain tissue was quantified retrospectively based on the computerised tomography (CT) images of six patients before and after DC by a non-linear image registration method. WC was related to specific gravity (SG), which in turn was related to the Hounsfield unit (HU) value in the CT images by a photoelectric correction according to the chemical composition of brain tissue.

RESULTS

For all the six patients, the strain level showed a substantial increase in the brain tissue close to the treated side of DC compared with that found at the pre-craniotomy period and ranged from 24 to 55 % at the post-craniotomy period. Increase of strain level was also observed at the brain tissue opposite to the treated side, however, to a much lesser extent. The mean area of craniotomy was found to be 91.1 ± 12.7 cm(2). The brain tissue volume increased from 27 to 127 ml, corresponding to 1.65 % and 8.13 % after DC in all six patients. Also, the increased volume seemed to correlate with increased strain level. Specifically, the overall WC of brain tissue for two patients evaluated presented a significant increase after the treatment compared with the condition seen before the treatment. Furthermore, the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) improved in four patients after the craniotomy, while two patients died. The GCS did not seem to correlate with the strain level.

CONCLUSIONS

We present a new numerical method to quantify the stretching or strain level of brain tissue and WC following DC. The significant increase in strain level and WC in the post-craniotomy period may cause electrophysiological changes in the axons, resulting in loss of neuronal function. Hence, this new numerical method provides more insight of the consequences following DC and may be used to better define the most optimal size and area of the craniotomy in reducing the strain level development.

Decompressive craniectomies, facts and fiction: a retrospective analysis of 526 cases

BACKGROUND

The aim of this article was to review the clinical practice of "bone flap decompression" in Regional Neurosurgical Units with no particular protocol in use.

METHODS

From January 2005 to December 2008, a retrospective and multicentre study was conducted on patients who were treated with decompressive craniectomy (DC) in seven departments of neurosurgery in Italy. This study included patients with traumatic brain injury, stroke, aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage and cerebral arteriovenous malformations. Data were retrieved from individual medical records.

RESULTS

We identified 526 patients with DC. Age was the most significant predictor factor of survival, together with pupil reactivity, time of decompression and size of the bone flap. The effect of age in predicting survival was so important that in patients over 65 years old we did not find any other significant factor related to survival. In younger patients, the survival rate was much better with a large bone flap (p = 0.01). Unfortunately, 57% of patients were decompressed with a bone flap of less than 12 cm in diameter. This was probably due to the association in 80% of cases between haematoma evacuation and decompression.

CONCLUSIONS

The current practice in many centres is different from published papers. Decompression is common over the age of 65 years, is associated with haematoma evacuation and often the bone flaps are inadequate in terms of size.

Access to reliable information about long-term prognosis influences clinical opinion on use of lifesaving intervention

BACKGROUND

Decompressive craniectomy has been traditionally used as a lifesaving rescue treatment in severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). This study assessed whether objective information on long-term prognosis would influence healthcare workers' opinion about using decompressive craniectomy as a lifesaving procedure for patients with severe TBI.

METHOD

A two-part structured interview was used to assess the participants' opinion to perform decompressive craniectomy for three patients who had very severe TBI. Their opinion was assessed before and after knowing the predicted and observed risks of an unfavourable long-term neurological outcome in various scenarios.

RESULTS

Five hundred healthcare workers with a wide variety of clinical backgrounds participated. The participants were significantly more likely to recommend decompressive craniectomy for their patients than for themselves (mean difference in visual analogue scale [VAS] -1.5, 95% confidence interval -1.3 to -1.6), especially when the next of kin of the patients requested intervention. Patients' preferences were more similar to patients who had advance directives. The participants' preferences to perform the procedure for themselves and their patients both significantly reduced after knowing the predicted risks of unfavourable outcomes, and the changes in attitude were consistent across different specialties, amount of experience in caring for similar patients, religious backgrounds, and positions in the specialty of the participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Access to objective information on risk of an unfavourable long-term outcome influenced healthcare workers' decision to recommend decompressive craniectomy, considered as a lifesaving procedure, for patients with very severe TBI.

Decompressive craniectomy – friend or foe?

Decompressive craniectomy (DC) is the surgical management removing part of the skull vault over a swollen brain used to treat elevated intracranial pressure that is unresponsive to maximal medical therapy. The commonest indication for DC is traumatic brain injury (TBI) or middle cerebral artery (MCA) infarction, though DC has been reported to have been used for treatment of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage and venous infarction. Despite an increasing number of reports supportive of DC, the controversy over the suitability of the procedure and criteria for patient selection remains unresolved. Although the majority of published studies are retrospective, the recent publication of several randomised prospective studies prompts a re-evaluation of the use of DC. We review the literature concerning the pathophysiology, indication, surgical techniques and timing, complications and long-term effects of DC (including reversal with cranioplasty), in order to rationalise its use. We conclude that at the time of this review, though we cannot support the routine use of DC in TBI or MCA stroke, there is evidence that early and aggressive use of DC in TBI patients with intracranial haematomas or younger malignant MCA stroke patients may improve outcome. Though the results of the DECRA trial suggest that primary DC may worsen outcome, the decision to perform DC after diffuse TBI is still individualised. We await the results of the RESCUEicp trial to ascertain whether an evidence-based protocol for its use can be agreed in the future.