Observed versus Predicted Outcome for Decompressive Craniectomy: A Population-Based Study

Controlled Decompression Alleviates Motor Dysfunction by Regulating Microglial Polarization via the HIF-1α Signaling Pathway in Intracranial Hypertension

Decompressive craniectomy (DC) is a major form of surgery that is used to reduce intracranial hypertension (IH), the most frequent cause of death and disability following severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) and stroke. Our previous research showed that controlled decompression (CDC) was more effective than rapid decompression (RDC) with regard to reducing the incidence of complications and improving outcomes after sTBI; however, the specific mechanisms involved have yet to be elucidated. In the present study, we investigated the effects of CDC in regulating inflammation after IH and attempted to identify the mechanisms involved. Analysis showed that CDC was more effective than RDC in alleviating motor dysfunction and neuronal death in a rat model of traumatic intracranial hypertension (TIH) created by epidural balloon pressurization. Moreover, RDC induced M1 microglia polarization and the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines. However, CDC treatment resulted in microglia primarily polarizing into the M2 phenotype and induced the significant release of anti-inflammatory cytokines. Mechanistically, the establishment of the TIH model led to the increased expression of hypoxia-inducible factor-1α (HIF-1α); CDC ameliorated cerebral hypoxia and reduced the expression of HIF-1α. In addition, 2-methoxyestradiol (2-ME2), a specific inhibitor of HIF-1α, significantly attenuated RDC-induced inflammation and improved motor function by promoting M1 to M2 phenotype transformation in microglial and enhancing the release of anti-inflammatory cytokines. However, dimethyloxaloylglycine (DMOG), an agonist of HIF-1α, abrogated the protective effects of CDC treatment by suppressing M2 microglia polarization and the release of anti-inflammatory cytokines. Collectively, our results indicated that CDC effectively alleviated IH-induced inflammation, neuronal death, and motor dysfunction by regulating HIF-1α-mediated microglial phenotype polarization. Our findings provide a better understanding of the mechanisms that underlie the protective effects of CDC and promote clinical translational research for HIF-1α in IH.

Evaluation of Outcomes Among Patients With Traumatic Intracranial Hypertension Treated With Decompressive Craniectomy vs Standard Medical Care at 24 Months: A Secondary Analysis of the RESCUEicp Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Trials often assess primary outcomes of traumatic brain injury at 6 months. Longer-term data are needed to assess outcomes for patients receiving surgical vs medical treatment for traumatic intracranial hypertension.

Objective

To evaluate 24-month outcomes for patients with traumatic intracranial hypertension treated with decompressive craniectomy or standard medical care.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Prespecified secondary analysis of the Randomized Evaluation of Surgery With Craniectomy for Uncontrollable Elevation of Intracranial Pressure (RESCUEicp) randomized clinical trial data was performed for patients with traumatic intracranial hypertension (>25 mm Hg) from 52 centers in 20 countries. Enrollment occurred between January 2004 and March 2014. Data were analyzed between 2018 and 2021. Eligibility criteria were age 10 to 65 years, traumatic brain injury (confirmed via computed tomography), intracranial pressure monitoring, and sustained and refractory elevated intracranial pressure for 1 to 12 hours despite pressure-controlling measures. Exclusion criteria were bilateral fixed and dilated pupils, bleeding diathesis, or unsurvivable injury.

Interventions

Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive a decompressive craniectomy with standard care (surgical group) or to ongoing medical treatment with the option to add barbiturate infusion (medical group).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was measured with the 8-point Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (1 indicates death and 8 denotes upper good recovery), and the 6- to 24-month outcome trajectory was examined.

Results

This study enrolled 408 patients: 206 in the surgical group and 202 in the medical group. The mean (SD) age was 32.3 (13.2) and 34.8 (13.7) years, respectively, and the study population was predominantly male (165 [81.7%] and 156 [80.0%], respectively). At 24 months, patients in the surgical group had reduced mortality (61 [33.5%] vs 94 [54.0%]; absolute difference, -20.5 [95% CI, -30.8 to -10.2]) and higher rates of vegetative state (absolute difference, 4.3 [95% CI, 0.0 to 8.6]), lower or upper moderate disability (4.7 [-0.9 to 10.3] vs 2.8 [-4.2 to 9.8]), and lower or upper severe disability (2.2 [-5.4 to 9.8] vs 6.5 [1.8 to 11.2]; χ27 = 24.20, P = .001). For every 100 individuals treated surgically, 21 additional patients survived at 24 months; 4 were in a vegetative state, 2 had lower and 7 had upper severe disability, and 5 had lower and 3 had upper moderate disability, respectively. Rates of lower and upper good recovery were similar for the surgical and medical groups (20 [11.0%] vs 19 [10.9%]), and significant differences in net improvement (≥1 grade) were observed between 6 and 24 months (55 [30.0%] vs 25 [14.0%]; χ22 = 13.27, P = .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

At 24 months, patients with surgically treated posttraumatic refractory intracranial hypertension had a sustained reduction in mortality and higher rates of vegetative state, severe disability, and moderate disability. Patients in the surgical group were more likely to improve over time vs patients in the medical group.

Trial Registration

ISRCTN Identifier: 66202560.

Ethical Considerations in Surgical Decompression for Stroke

Stroke is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Neurosurgical decompression is often considered for the treatment of malignant infarcts and intraparenchymal hemorrhages, but this treatment can be frought with ethical dilemmas. In this article, the authors outline the primary principles of bioethics and their application to stroke care, provide an overview of key ethical issues and special situations in the neurosurgical management of stroke, and highlight methods to improve ethical decision-making for patients with stroke. Understanding these ethical principles is essential for stroke care teams to deliver appropriate, timely, and ethical care to patients with stroke.

Decompressive craniectomy practice following traumatic brain injury, in comparison with randomized trials

High quality evidence shows decompressive craniectomy (DC) following traumatic brain injury (TBI) may improve survival but increase the number of severely disabled survivors. Contemporary international practice is unknown. We sought to describe international use of DC, and the alignment with evidence and clinical practice guidelines, by analyzing the harmonized CENTER-TBI and OzENTER-TBI Core study datasets. These include patients admitted to ICUs in Europe, the United Kingdom and Australia between 2015 and 2017. Outcomes of interest were treatment with DC relative to clinical trial evidence and the Brain Trauma Foundation guidelines. Of 2336 people admitted to ICUs following TBI, DC was performed in 320 (13.7%): in 64/1422 (4.5%) patients with diffuse TBI, and 195/640 (30.5%) patients with traumatic mass lesions. Secondary DC (for treatment of intracranial hypertension) was used infrequently in patients who met enrolment criteria of the two randomised clinical trials informing the guidelines: in 11/124 (8.9%) of those matching DECRA enrolment, and in 30/224 (13.4%) of those matching RESCUEicp. Of patients who underwent DC 258/320 (80.6%) were ineligible for either trial: 149/320 (46.6%) underwent primary DC, 62/320 (19.4%) were outside the trials' age criteria, and 126/320 (39.4%) did not develop intracranial hypertension refractory to non-operative therapies prior to DC. Secondary DC was used infrequently in patients in whom it had been shown to be potentially harmful, indicating alignment between contemporaneous evidence and practice. However, most patients who underwent DC were ineligible for the key trials; whether they benefitted from DC remains unknown.

Random Forest-Based Prediction of Outcome and Mortality in Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury Undergoing Primary Decompressive Craniectomy

BACKGROUND

Various prognostic models are used to predict mortality and functional outcome in patients after traumatic brain injury with a trend to incorporate machine learning protocols. None of these models is focused exactly on the subgroup of patients indicated for decompressive craniectomy. Evidence regarding efficiency of this surgery is still incomplete, especially in patients undergoing primary decompressive craniectomy with evacuation of traumatic mass lesions.

METHODS

In a prospective study with a 6-month follow-up period, we assessed postoperative outcome and mortality of 40 patients who underwent primary decompressive craniectomy for traumatic brain injuries during 2018-2019. The results were analyzed in relation to a wide spectrum of preoperatively available demographic, clinical, radiographic, and laboratory data. Random forest algorithms were trained for prediction of both mortality and unfavorable outcome, with their accuracy quantified by area under the receiver operating curves (AUCs) for out-of-bag samples.

RESULTS

At the end of the follow-up period, we observed mortality of 57.5%. Favorable outcome (Glasgow Outcome Scale [GOS] score 4-5) was achieved by 30% of our patients. Random forest-based prediction models constructed for 6-month mortality and outcome reached a moderate predictive ability, with AUC = 0.811 and AUC = 0.873, respectively. Random forest models trained on handpicked variables showed slightly decreased AUC = 0.787 for 6-month mortality and AUC = 0.846 for 6-month outcome and increased out-of-bag error rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Random forest algorithms show promising results in prediction of postoperative outcome and mortality in patients undergoing primary decompressive craniectomy. The best performance was achieved by Classification Random forest for 6-month outcome.

Management of Australian Patients with Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: Are Potentially Harmful Treatments Still Used?

Clinical trials have shown that intravenous albumin and decompressive craniectomy to treat early refractory intracranial hypertension can cause harm in patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). The extent to which these treatments remain in use is unknown. We conducted a multi-center retrospective cohort study of adult patients with severe TBI admitted to five neurotrauma centers across Australia between April 2013 and March 2015. Patients were identified from local trauma and intensive care unit (ICU) registries and followed until hospital discharge. Main outcome measures were the administration of intravenous albumin, and decompressive craniectomy for intracranial hypertension. Analyses were predominantly descriptive. There were 303 patients with severe TBI, of whom a minority received albumin (6.9%) or underwent early decompressive craniectomy for treatment of refractory intracranial hypertension complicating diffuse TBI (2.3%). The median (intequartile range [IQR]) age was 35 (24, 58), and most injuries were caused by road traffic accidents (57.4%) or falls (25.1%). Overall, 34.3% of patients died while in the hospital and the remainder were discharged to rehabilitation (44.6%), other health care facilities (4.6%), or home (16.5%). There were no patient characteristics significantly associated with use of albumin or craniectomy. Intravenous albumin and craniectomy for treatment of intracranial hypertension were used infrequently in Australian neurotrauma centers, indicating alignment between best available evidence and practice.

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.

Comparison of the CRASH Score-Predicted and Real Outcome of Traumatic Brain Injury in a Retrospective Analysis of 417 Patients

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this retrospective study was to externally validate the CRASH (Corticosteroid Randomisation After Significant Head Injury) clinical calculator as a prognostic tool. Mortality at 14 days and an unfavorable outcome (i.e., Glasgow Outcome Scale score <4) after 6 months were the primary endpoints.

METHODS

The study included adult patients admitted to the emergency department of Ghent University Hospital during 2010-2014 with traumatic brain injury. The CRASH score was calculated for every patient and compared with real-life outcome at 14 days and 6 months. Researchers were blinded for each other's results, and each observer either calculated the CRASH score or obtained clinical outcome. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to validate the CRASH calculator. The prognostic value of other variables was tested using logistic regression (P < 0.05 was significant).

RESULTS

Of 417 included patients with traumatic brain injury, 94.7% were still alive at 14 days, and 65% had a Glasgow Outcome Scale score ≥4 at 6 months. Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed an area under the curve of 92.1% at 14 days and 90.7% at 6 months (P < 0.05). Calculated cutoff value for the CRASH score at 14 days was 31.50% (sensitivity 0.823, specificity 0.895). At 6 months, calculated cutoff value was 55.75% (sensitivity 0.793, specificity 0.830).

CONCLUSIONS

The CRASH calculator is a good predictor of outcome in traumatic brain injury at 14 days and 6 months with high sensitivity and specificity. It does not replace clinical judgment of the physician treating the patient in the emergency department, but it constitutes a useful additional tool.

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.

Reconsidering the role of decompressive craniectomy for neurological emergencies

OBJECTIVE

There is little doubt that decompressive craniectomy can reduce mortality. However, there is concern that any reduction in mortality comes at an increase in the number of survivors with severe neurological disability.

METHOD

Over the past decade there have been several randomised controlled trials comparing surgical decompression with standard medical therapy in the context of ischaemic stroke and severe traumatic brain injury. The results of each trial are evaluated.

RESULTS

There is now unequivocal evidence that a decompressive craniectomy reduces mortality in the context of "malignant" middle infarction and following severe traumatic brain injury. However, it has only been possible to demonstrate an improvement in outcome by categorizing a mRS of 4 and upper severe disability as favourable outcome. This is contentious and an alternative interpretation is that surgical decompression reduces mortality but exposes a patient to a greater risk of survival with severe disability.

CONCLUSION

It would appear unlikely that further randomised controlled trials will be possible given the significant reduction in mortality achieved by surgical decompression. It may be that observational cohort studies and outcome prediction models may provide data to determine those patients most likely to benefit from surgical decompression.

Trial of Decompressive Craniectomy for Traumatic Intracranial Hypertension

BACKGROUND

The effect of decompressive craniectomy on clinical outcomes in patients with refractory traumatic intracranial hypertension remains unclear.

METHODS

From 2004 through 2014, we randomly assigned 408 patients, 10 to 65 years of age, with traumatic brain injury and refractory elevated intracranial pressure (>25 mm Hg) to undergo decompressive craniectomy or receive ongoing medical care. The primary outcome was the rating on the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS-E) (an 8-point scale, ranging from death to "upper good recovery" [no injury-related problems]) at 6 months. The primary-outcome measure was analyzed with an ordinal method based on the proportional-odds model. If the model was rejected, that would indicate a significant difference in the GOS-E distribution, and results would be reported descriptively.

RESULTS

The GOS-E distribution differed between the two groups (P<0.001). The proportional-odds assumption was rejected, and therefore results are reported descriptively. At 6 months, the GOS-E distributions were as follows: death, 26.9% among 201 patients in the surgical group versus 48.9% among 188 patients in the medical group; vegetative state, 8.5% versus 2.1%; lower severe disability (dependent on others for care), 21.9% versus 14.4%; upper severe disability (independent at home), 15.4% versus 8.0%; moderate disability, 23.4% versus 19.7%; and good recovery, 4.0% versus 6.9%. At 12 months, the GOS-E distributions were as follows: death, 30.4% among 194 surgical patients versus 52.0% among 179 medical patients; vegetative state, 6.2% versus 1.7%; lower severe disability, 18.0% versus 14.0%; upper severe disability, 13.4% versus 3.9%; moderate disability, 22.2% versus 20.1%; and good recovery, 9.8% versus 8.4%. Surgical patients had fewer hours than medical patients with intracranial pressure above 25 mm Hg after randomization (median, 5.0 vs. 17.0 hours; P<0.001) but had a higher rate of adverse events (16.3% vs. 9.2%, P=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

At 6 months, decompressive craniectomy in patients with traumatic brain injury and refractory intracranial hypertension resulted in lower mortality and higher rates of vegetative state, lower severe disability, and upper severe disability than medical care. The rates of moderate disability and good recovery were similar in the two groups. (Funded by the Medical Research Council and others; RESCUEicp Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN66202560 .).

Decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury: clinical study, literature review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To examine the clinical and neurological outcome of patients who sustained a severe non-penetrating traumatic brain injury (TBI) and underwent unilateral decompressive craniectomy (DC) for refractory intracranial hypertension.

DESIGN

Single center, retrospective, observational.

SETTING

Level I Trauma Center in Portland, Maine.

PATIENTS

31 patients aged 16-72 of either sex who sustained a severe, non-penetrating TBI and underwent a unilateral DC for evacuation of parenchymal or extra-axial hematoma or for failure of medical therapy to control intracranial pressure (ICP).

INTERVENTIONS

Review of the electronic medical record of patients undergoing DC for severe TBI and assessment of extended Glasgow Outcome Score (e-GOS) at 6-months following DC.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The mean age was 39.3y ± 14.5. The initial GCS was 5.8 ± 3.2, and the ISS was 29.7 ± 6.3. Twenty-two patients underwent DC within the first 24 h, two within the next 24 h and seven between the 3rd and 7th day post injury. The pre-DC ICP was 30.7 ± 10.3 and the ICP was 12.1 ± 6.2 post-DC. Cranioplasty was performed in all surviving patients 1-4 months post-DC. Of the 29 survivors following DC, the e-GOS was 8 in seven patients, and 7 in ten patients. The e-GOS was 5-6 in 6 others. Of the 6 survivors with poor outcomes (e-GOS = 2-4), five were the initial patients in the series.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with intractable cerebral hypertension following TBI, unilateral DC in concert with practice guideline directed brain resuscitation is associated with good functional outcome and acceptable-mortality.

Predicting long-term neurological outcomes after severe traumatic brain injury requiring decompressive craniectomy: A comparison of the CRASH and IMPACT prognostic models

BACKGROUND

Predicting long-term neurological outcomes after severe traumatic brain (TBI) is important, but which prognostic model in the context of decompressive craniectomy has the best performance remains uncertain.

METHODS

This prospective observational cohort study included all patients who had severe TBI requiring decompressive craniectomy between 2004 and 2014, in the two neurosurgical centres in Perth, Western Australia. Severe disability, vegetative state, or death were defined as unfavourable neurological outcomes. Area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUROC) and slope and intercept of the calibration curve were used to assess discrimination and calibration of the CRASH (Corticosteroid-Randomisation-After-Significant-Head injury) and IMPACT (International-Mission-For-Prognosis-And-Clinical-Trial) models, respectively.

RESULTS

Of the 319 patients included in the study, 119 (37%) had unfavourable neurological outcomes at 18-month after decompressive craniectomy for severe TBI. Both CRASH (AUROC 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.81-0.90) and IMPACT full-model (AUROC 0.85, 95% CI 0.80-0.89) were similar in discriminating between favourable and unfavourable neurological outcome at 18-month after surgery (p=0.690 for the difference in AUROC derived from the two models). Although both models tended to over-predict the risks of long-term unfavourable outcome, the IMPACT model had a slightly better calibration than the CRASH model (intercept of the calibration curve=-4.1 vs. -5.7, and log likelihoods -159 vs. -360, respectively), especially when the predicted risks of unfavourable outcome were <80%.

CONCLUSIONS

Both CRASH and IMPACT prognostic models were good in discriminating between favourable and unfavourable long-term neurological outcome for patients with severe TBI requiring decompressive craniectomy, but the calibration of the IMPACT full-model was better than the CRASH model.

Uncertainty, conflict and consent: revisiting the futility debate in neurotrauma

The concept of futility has been debated for many years, and a precise definition remains elusive. This is not entirely unsurprising given the increasingly complex and evolving nature of modern medicine. Progressively more complex decisions are required when considering increasingly sophisticated diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. Allocating resources appropriately amongst a population whose expectations continue to increase raises a number of ethical issues not least of which are the difficulties encountered when consideration is being given to withholding "life-preserving" treatment. In this discussion we have used decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury as a clinical example with which to frame an approach to the concept. We have defined those issues that initially lead us to consider futility and thereafter actually provoke a significant discussion. We contend that these issues are uncertainty, conflict and consent. We then examine recent scientific advances in outcome prediction that may address some of the uncertainty and perhaps help achieve consensus amongst stakeholders. Whilst we do not anticipate that this re-framing of the idea of futility is applicable to all medical situations, the approach to specify patient-centred benefit may assist those making such decisions when patients are incompetent to participate.

Complications Associated with Decompressive Craniectomy: A Systematic Review

Decompressive craniectomy (DC) has been used for many years in the management of patients with elevated intracranial pressure and cerebral edema. Ongoing clinical trials are investigating the clinical and cost effectiveness of DC in trauma and stroke. While DC has demonstrable efficacy in saving life, it is accompanied by a myriad of non-trivial complications that have been inadequately highlighted in prospective clinical trials. Missing from our current understanding is a comprehensive analysis of all potential complications associated with DC. Here, we review the available literature, we tabulate all reported complications, and we calculate their frequency for specific indications. Of over 1500 records initially identified, a final total of 142 eligible records were included in our comprehensive analysis. We identified numerous complications related to DC that have not been systematically reviewed. Complications were of three major types: (1) Hemorrhagic (2) Infectious/Inflammatory, and (3) Disturbances of the CSF compartment. Complications associated with cranioplasty fell under similar major types, with additional complications relating to the bone flap. Overall, one of every ten patients undergoing DC may suffer a complication necessitating additional medical and/or neurosurgical intervention. While DC has received increased attention as a potential therapeutic option in a variety of situations, like any surgical procedure, DC is not without risk. Neurologists and neurosurgeons must be aware of all the potential complications of DC in order to properly advise their patients.

Long-term survival with unfavourable outcome: a qualitative and ethical analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the issue of 'retrospective consent' among a cohort of patients who had survived with unfavourable outcome and to assess attitudes among next of kin regarding their role as surrogate decision makers.

METHODS

Twenty patients who had survived for at least 3 years with an unfavourable outcome following a decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury were assessed with their next of kin. During the course of a semistructured interview, participants were asked whether they would have provided consent if they had known their eventual outcome. They were also asked for general comments regarding all aspects of the clinical journey. Eighteen patients had next of kin who were available for interview. For two patients, there was no longer any family involvement.

RESULTS

Of the 20 patients, 13 were able to provide a response and 11 felt that they would have provided consent even if they had known their eventual outcome. Of the 18 next of kin who were able to express an opinion, 10 felt that they would have provided retrospective consent.

CONCLUSIONS

Many patients appeared to have adapted to a level of disability that competent individuals might deem unacceptable. This does not necessarily mean that such outcomes should be regarded as 'favourable', nor that decompressive craniectomy must be performed for patients with predicted poor outcome. Nevertheless, those burdened with the initial clinical decisions and thereafter the long-term care of these patients may draw some support from the knowledge that unfavourable may not necessarily be unacceptable.

Decompressive craniectomy in severe traumatic brain injury: prognostic factors and complications

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the clinical characteristics, complications and factors associated with the prognosis of severe traumatic brain injury among patients who undergo a decompressive craniectomy.

METHODS

Retrospective study of patients seen in an intensive care unit with severe traumatic brain injury in whom a decompressive craniectomy was performed between the years 2003 and 2012. Patients were followed until their discharge from the intensive care unit. Their clinical-tomographic characteristics, complications, and factors associated with prognosis (univariate and multivariate analysis) were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 64 patients were studied. Primary and lateral decompressive craniectomies were performed for the majority of patients. A high incidence of complications was found (78% neurological and 52% nonneurological). A total of 42 patients (66%) presented poor outcomes, and 22 (34%) had good neurological outcomes. Of the patients who survived, 61% had good neurological outcomes. In the univariate analysis, the factors significantly associated with poor neurological outcome were postdecompressive craniectomy intracranial hypertension, greater severity and worse neurological state at admission. In the multivariate analysis, only postcraniectomy intracranial hypertension was significantly associated with a poor outcome.

CONCLUSION

This study involved a very severe and difficult to manage group of patients with high morbimortality. Intracranial hypertension was a main factor of poor outcome in this population.

Decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury: the relationship between surgical complications and the prediction of an unfavourable outcome

OBJECT

To assess the impact that injury severity has on complications in patients who have had a decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury (TBI).

METHODS

This prospective observational cohort study included all patients who underwent a decompressive craniectomy following severe TBI at the two major trauma hospitals in Western Australia from 2004 to 2012. All complications were recorded during this period. The clinical and radiological data of the patients on initial presentation were entered into a web-based model prognostic model, the CRASH (Corticosteroid Randomization After Significant Head injury) collaborators prediction model, to obtain the predicted risk of an unfavourable outcome which was used as a measure of injury severity.

RESULTS

Complications after decompressive craniectomy for severe TBI were common. The predicted risk of unfavourable outcome was strongly associated with the development of neurological complications such as herniation of the brain outside the skull bone defects (median predicted risk of unfavourable outcome for herniation 72% vs. 57% without herniation, p=0.001), subdural effusion (median predicted risk of unfavourable outcome 67% with an effusion vs. 57% for those without an effusion, p=0.03), hydrocephalus requiring ventriculo-peritoneal shunt (median predicted risk of unfavourable outcome 86% for those with hydrocephalus vs. 59% for those without hydrocephalus, p=0.001), but not infection (p=0.251) or resorption of bone flap (p=0.697) and seizures (0.987). We did not observe any associations between timing of cranioplasty and risk of infection or resorption of bone flap after cranioplasty.

CONCLUSIONS

Mechanical complications after decompressive craniectomy including herniation of the brain outside the skull bone defects, subdural effusion, and hydrocephalus requiring ventriculo-peritoneal shunt were more common in patients with a more severe form of TBI when quantified by the CRASH predicted risk of unfavourable outcome. The CRASH predicted risk of unfavourable outcome represents a useful baseline characteristic of patients in observational and interventional trials involving patients with severe TBI requiring decompressive craniectomy.

Prognostic significance of blood-brain barrier disruption in patients with severe nonpenetrating traumatic brain injury requiring decompressive craniectomy

OBJECT

The authors assessed the risk factors and outcomes associated with blood-brain barrier (BBB) disruption in patients with severe, nonpenetrating, traumatic brain injury (TBI) requiring decompressive craniectomy.

METHODS

At 2 major neurotrauma centers in Western Australia, a retrospective cohort study was conducted among 97 adult neurotrauma patients who required an external ventricular drain (EVD) and decompressive craniectomy during 2004-2012. Glasgow Outcome Scale scores were used to assess neurological outcomes. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with BBB disruption, defined by a ratio of total CSF protein concentrations to total plasma protein concentration > 0.007 in the earliest CSF specimen collected after TBI.

RESULTS

Of the 252 patients who required decompressive craniectomy, 97 (39%) required an EVD to control intracranial pressure, and biochemical evidence of BBB disruption was observed in 43 (44%). Presence of disruption was associated with more severe TBI (median predicted risk for unfavorable outcome 75% vs 63%, respectively; p = 0.001) and with worse outcomes at 6, 12, and 18 months than was absence of BBB disruption (72% vs 37% unfavorable outcomes, respectively; p = 0.015). The only risk factor significantly associated with increased risk for BBB disruption was presence of nonevacuated intracerebral hematoma (> 1 cm diameter) (OR 3.03, 95% CI 1.23-7.50; p = 0.016). Although BBB disruption was associated with more severe TBI and worse long-term outcomes, when combined with the prognostic information contained in the Corticosteroid Randomization after Significant Head Injury (CRASH) prognostic model, it did not seem to add significant prognostic value (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.855 vs 0.864, respectively; p = 0.453).

CONCLUSIONS

Biochemical evidence of BBB disruption after severe nonpenetrating TBI was common, especially among patients with large intracerebral hematomas. Disruption of the BBB was associated with more severe TBI and worse long-term outcomes, but when combined with the prognostic information contained in the CRASH prognostic model, this information did not add significant prognostic value.

Validation of the CRASH model in the prediction of 18-month mortality and unfavorable outcome in severe traumatic brain injury requiring decompressive craniectomy

Object

The goal in this study was to assess the validity of the corticosteroid randomization after significant head injury (CRASH) collaborators prediction model in predicting mortality and unfavorable outcome at 18 months in patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) requiring decompressive craniectomy. In addition, the authors aimed to assess whether this model was well calibrated in predicting outcome across a wide spectrum of severity of TBI requiring decompressive craniectomy.

Methods

This prospective observational cohort study included all patients who underwent a decompressive craniectomy following severe TBI at the two major trauma hospitals in Western Australia between 2004 and 2012 and for whom 18-month follow-up data were available. Clinical and radiological data on initial presentation were entered into the Web-based model and the predicted outcome was compared with the observed outcome. In validating the CRASH model, the authors used area under the receiver operating characteristic curve to assess the ability of the CRASH model to differentiate between favorable and unfavorable outcomes.

Results

The ability of the CRASH 6-month unfavorable prediction model to differentiate between unfavorable and favorable outcomes at 18 months after decompressive craniectomy was good (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.85, 95% CI 0.80–0.90). However, the model's calibration was not perfect. The slope and the intercept of the calibration curve were 1.66 (SE 0.21) and −1.11 (SE 0.14), respectively, suggesting that the predicted risks of unfavorable outcomes were not sufficiently extreme or different across different risk strata and were systematically too high (or overly pessimistic), respectively.

Conclusions

The CRASH collaborators prediction model can be used as a surrogate index of injury severity to stratify patients according to injury severity. However, clinical decisions should not be based solely on the predicted risks derived from the model, because the number of patients in each predicted risk stratum was still relatively small and hence the results were relatively imprecise. Notwithstanding these limitations, the model may add to a clinician's ability to have better-informed conversations with colleagues and patients' relatives about prognosis.

Decompressive craniectomy for management of traumatic brain injury: an update

Decompressive craniectomy (DC) for the management of severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) has a long history but remains controversial. Although DC has been shown to improve both survival and functional outcome in patients with malignant cerebral infarctions, evidence of benefit in patients with TBI is decidedly more mixed. Craniectomy can clearly be life-saving in the presence of medically intractable elevations of intracranial pressure. Craniectomy also has been consistently demonstrated to reduce "therapeutic intensity" in the ICU, to reduce the need for intracranial-pressure-directed and brain-oxygen-directed interventions, and to reduce ICU length of stay. Still, the only randomized trial of DC in TBI failed to demonstrate any benefit. Studies of therapies for TBI, including hemicraniectomy, are challenging owing to the inherent heterogeneity in the pathophysiology observed in this disease. Craniectomy can be life-saving for patients with severe TBI, but many questions remain regarding its ideal application, and the outcome remains highly correlated with the severity of the initial injury.

Decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury: is life worth living?

OBJECT

The object of this study was to assess the long-term outcome and quality of life of patients who have survived with severe disability following decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury (TBI).

METHODS

The authors assessed outcome beyond 3 years among a cohort of 39 patients who had been adjudged either severely disabled or in vegetative state 18 months after decompressive craniectomy for TBI. Assessments performed included the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale, modified Barthel Index (mBI), Zarit Burden Interview, and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). The issue of retrospective consent for surgery was also assessed.

RESULTS

Of the 39 eligible patients, 7 died, 12 were lost to follow-up, and 20 patients or their next of kin consented to participate in the study. Among those 20 patients, 5 in a vegetative state at 18 months remained so beyond 3 years, and the other 15 patients remained severely disabled after a median follow-up of 5 years. The patients' average daily activity per the mBI (Pearson correlation coefficient [r] = -0.661, p = 0.01) and SF-36 physical score (r = -0.543, p = 0.037) were inversely correlated with the severity of TBI. However, the SF-36 mental scores of the patients were reasonably high (median 46, interquartile range 37-52). The majority of patients and their next of kin believed that they would have provided consent for surgical decompression even if they had known the eventual outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial physical recovery beyond 18 months after decompressive craniectomy for severe TBI was not observed; however, many patients appeared to have recalibrated their expectations regarding what they believed to be an acceptable quality of life.

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.

Development of a bioactive implant for repair and potential healing of cranial defects

The repair of complex craniofacial bone defects is challenging and a successful result is dependent on the size of the defect, quality of the soft tissue covering the defect, and choice of reconstruction method. The objective of this study was to develop a bioactive cranial implant that could provide a permanent reconstructive solution to the patient by stimulating bone healing of the defect. In this paper the authors report on the feasibility and clinical results of using such a newly developed device for the repair of a large traumatic and therapy-resistant cranial bone defect. The patient had undergone numerous attempts at repair, in which established methods had been tried without success. A mosaic-designed device was manufactured and implanted, comprising interconnected ceramic tiles with a defined calcium phosphate composition. The clinical outcome 30 months after surgery revealed a restored cranial vault without postoperative complications. Computed tomography demonstrated signs of bone ingrowth. Examination with combined (18)F-fluoride PET and CT provided further evidence of bone healing of the cranial defect.

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.

Use of the CRASH study prognosis calculator in patients with severe traumatic brain injury treated with an intracranial pressure-targeted therapy

Based on the Corticosteroid Randomisation after Significant Head Injury (CRASH) trial database, a prognosis calculator has been developed for the prediction of outcome in an individual patient with a head injury. In 47 patients with severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) prospectively treated using an intracranial pressure (ICP) targeted therapy, the individual prognosis for mortality at 14 days and unfavourable outcome at 6 months was calculated and compared with the actual outcome. An overestimation of the risk of mortality and unfavourable outcome was found. The mean risk for mortality and unfavourable outcome were estimated to be 44.6±32.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 35.1-54.2%) and 69.3±23.7% (95% CI, 62.3-76.2%). The actual outcome was 4.3% and 42.6% respectively. The absolute risk reduction (ARR) for mortality was 33.1% and for unfavourable outcome 29.8%. A logistic fit for outcome at 6 months shows a statistically significant difference (p<0.01). A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis shows an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.691. The CRASH prognosis calculator overestimates the risk of mortality and unfavourable outcome in patients with sTBI treated with an ICP-targeted therapy based on the Lund concept. We do not advocate the use of the calculator for treatment decisions in individual patients. We further conclude that patients with blunt sTBI admitted within 8 hours of trauma should be treated regardless of their clinical status as long as the initial cerebral perfusion pressure is >10 mmHg.

[The impact of early cranioplasty on cerebral blood flow and its correlation with neurological and cognitive outcome. Prospective multi-centre study on 24 patients]

INTRODUCTION

Cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy in patients suffering from severe head injury often leads to a functional improvement although, to date, the pathophysiology of this phenomenon remains unclear. A few hypotheses have been proposed. The impact of cranioplasty on cerebral perfusion could be one explanation. We have evaluated the impact of cranioplasty on the functional status of patients undergoing decompressive craniectomy for severe head injury with its influence on cerebral perfusion.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-four patients undergoing craniectomy for severe head injury were included in this multi-centric and prospective study. All of them had a cranioplasty within 12 weeks following decompressive craniectomy. A clinical and radiological evaluation was performed prior to and after cranioplasty. Neurological and cognitive evaluation was performed with the Glasgow Outcome Score (GOS), the Frontal Assessment Battery (FAB) and the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE). Radiological evaluation was performed by perfusion CT scan and transcranial Doppler.

RESULTS

A statistically significant neurological and cognitive improvement was observed in 92% of patients at 6 months follow-up (F-U). Brain perfusion was improved at 6 weeks F-U, predominantly in the affected hemisphere. Systolic and diastolic blood velocity flow were improved in both middle cerebral arteries.

CONCLUSION

Cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy for patients suffering from severe head injury probably improves the functional outcome of these patients, thanks to a global improvement of cerebral perfusion.

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.

An injury awareness education program on outcomes of juvenile justice offenders in Western Australia: an economic analysis

Background

Injury is a major cause of mortality and morbidity of young people and the cost-effectiveness of many injury prevention programs remains uncertain. This study aimed to analyze the costs and benefits of an injury awareness education program, the P.A.R.T.Y. (Prevent Alcohol and Risk-related Trauma in Youth) program, for juvenile justice offenders in Western Australia.

Methods

Costs and benefits analysis based on effectiveness data from a linked-data cohort study on 225 juvenile justice offenders who were referred to the education program and 3434 who were not referred to the program between 2006 and 2011.

Results

During the study period, there were 8869 hospitalizations and 113 deaths due to violence or traffic-related injuries among those aged between 14 and 21 in Western Australia. The mean length of hospital stay was 4.6 days, a total of 320 patients (3.6%) needed an intensive care admission with an average length of stay of 6 days. The annual cost saved due to serious injury was $3,765 and the annual net cost of running this program was $33,735. The estimated cost per offence prevented, cost per serious injury avoided, and cost per undiscounted and discounted life year gained were $3,124, $42,169, $8,268 and $17,910, respectively. Increasing the frequency of the program from once per month to once per week would increase its cost-effectiveness substantially.

Conclusions

The P.A.R.T.Y. injury education program involving real-life trauma scenarios was cost-effective in reducing subsequent risk of committing violence or traffic-related offences, injuries, and death for juvenile justice offenders in Western Australia.

Prediction of outcome after moderate and severe traumatic brain injury: external validation of the International Mission on Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials (IMPACT) and Corticoid Randomisation After Significant Head injury (CRASH) prognostic models

OBJECTIVE

The International Mission on Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials and Corticoid Randomisation After Significant Head injury prognostic models predict outcome after traumatic brain injury but have not been compared in large datasets. The objective of this is study is to validate externally and compare the International Mission on Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials and Corticoid Randomisation after Significant Head injury prognostic models for prediction of outcome after moderate or severe traumatic brain injury.

DESIGN

External validation study.

PATIENTS

We considered five new datasets with a total of 9,036 patients, comprising three randomized trials and two observational series, containing prospectively collected individual traumatic brain injury patient data.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Outcomes were mortality and unfavorable outcome, based on the Glasgow Outcome Score at 6 months after injury. To assess performance, we studied the discrimination of the models (by area under the receiver operating characteristic curves), and calibration (by comparison of the mean observed to predicted outcomes and calibration slopes). The highest discrimination was found in the Trauma Audit and Research Network trauma registry (area under the receiver operating characteristic curves between 0.83 and 0.87), and the lowest discrimination in the Pharmos trial (area under the receiver operating characteristic curves between 0.65 and 0.71). Although differences in predictor effects between development and validation populations were found (calibration slopes varying between 0.58 and 1.53), the differences in discrimination were largely explained by differences in case mix in the validation studies. Calibration was good, the fraction of observed outcomes generally agreed well with the mean predicted outcome. No meaningful differences were noted in performance between the International Mission on Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials and Corticoid Randomisation After Significant Head injury models. More complex models discriminated slightly better than simpler variants.

CONCLUSIONS

Since both the International Mission on Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials and the Corticoid Randomisation After Significant Head injury prognostic models show good generalizability to more recent data, they are valid instruments to quantify prognosis in traumatic brain injury.

Complications of delayed cranial repair after decompressive craniectomy in children less than 1 year old

BACKGROUND

Decompressive craniectomy is an effective treatment option in case of refractory intracranial hypertension after severe head injury. The incidence of complications following cranial repair after decompressive craniectomy for traumatic brain injury is not negligible, particularly in infants and young toddlers. However, only a few dedicated papers can be found in the literature.

METHOD

We describe the complications observed in two boys and one girl under 1 year of age that were treated in the last decade by hemicranial decompressive craniotomy and enlarging hemispheric duraplasty, and subsequent cranial repair by means of autologous bone-flap replacement.

FINDINGS

Despite good clinical and neurological outcome, the postoperative clinical course was complicated in all cases by early or late evidence of subdural fluid collections associated to the occurrence of hydrocephalus and causing recurrent dislocation and progressive resorption of the autologous bone flap.

CONCLUSIONS

Infants less than 1 year old, undergoing decompressive craniectomy after traumatic brain injury, experience a high rate of complications following subsequent cranial repair. Subdural collections and resorption of the autologous bone flap are to be considered as extremely common complications.

Simultaneous repair of two large cranial defects using rapid prototyping and custom computer-designed titanium plates: a case report

Custom titanium cranioplasty plates, manufactured by a variety of techniques, have been used to repair a range of cranial defects. The authors present a case where two relatively large, adjacent cranial defects were repaired by custom computer-designed titanium plates. The two plates were designed and fabricated simultaneously using a unique methodology. A 28-year-old woman underwent a corpus callosotomy for medically intractable epilepsy. The surgery was complicated by unexpected haemorrhage which necessitated a second craniotomy. Subsequent deep infection required the removal of bilateral bone flaps, presenting a challenge in the reconstruction of extensive, bilateral but asymmetrical cranial defects. The patient underwent a head computed tomography scan, from which a rapid-prototype model of the skull was produced. The surfaces for the missing cranial segments were generated virtually using a combination of software products and two titanium plates that followed these virtual contours were manufactured to cover the defects. The cranioplasty procedure to implant both titanium cranial plates was performed efficiently with no intra-operative complications. Intra-operatively, an excellent fit was achieved. The careful planning of the plates enhanced the relative ease with which the cranial defects were repaired with an excellent cosmetic outcome.

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.