Outcome of Decompressive Craniectomy in Patients With Severe Head Injury: A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial

Long-Term Outcomes in Severe Traumatic Brain Injury and Associated Factors: A Prospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

The presence of focal lesion (FL) after a severe traumatic brain injury is an important factor in determining morbidity and mortality. Despite this relevance, few studies show the pattern of recovery of patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) with FL within one year. The objective of this study was to identify the pattern of recovery, independence to perform activities of daily living (ADL), and factors associated with mortality and unfavorable outcome at six and twelve months after severe TBI with FL.

METHODOLOGY

This is a prospective cohort, with data collected at admission, hospital discharge, three, six, and twelve months after TBI.

RESULTS

The study included 131 adults with a mean age of 34.08 years. At twelve months, 39% of the participants died, 80% were functionally independent by the Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended, 79% by the Disability Rating Scale, 79% were independent for performing ADLs by the Katz Index, and 53.9% by the Lawton Scale. Report of alcohol intake, sedation time, length of stay in intensive care (ICU LOS), Glasgow Coma Scale, trauma severity indices, hyperglycemia, blood glucose, and infection were associated with death. At six and twelve months, tachypnea, age, ICU LOS, trauma severity indices, respiratory rate, multiple radiographic injuries, and cardiac rate were associated with dependence.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients have satisfactory functional recovery up to twelve months after trauma, with an accentuated improvement in the first three months. Clinical and sociodemographic variables were associated with post-trauma outcomes. Almost all victims of severe TBI with focal lesions evolved to death or independence.

Radiographic predictors of clinical outcome in traumatic brain injury after decompressive craniectomy

BACKGROUND

Primary decompressive craniectomy (DC) is considered for traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients with clinical deterioration, presenting large amounts of high-density lesions on computed tomography (CT). Postoperative CT findings may be suitable for prognostic evaluation. This study evaluated the radiographic predictors of clinical outcome and survival using pre- and postoperative CT scans of such patients.

METHODS

We enrolled 150 patients with moderate to severe TBI who underwent primary DC. They were divided into two groups based on the 6-month postoperative Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended scores (1-4, unfavorable; 5-8, favorable). Radiographic parameters, including hemorrhage type, location, presence of skull fracture, midline shifting, hemispheric diameter, effacement of cisterns, parenchymal hypodensity, and craniectomy size, were reviewed. Stepwise logistic regression analysis was used to identify the prognostic factors of clinical outcome and 6-month mortality.

RESULTS

Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that age (odds ratio [OR] = 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.032-1.151; p = 0.002), postoperative low density (OR = 12.58; 95% CI 1.247-126.829; p = 0.032), and postoperative effacement of the ambient cistern (OR = 14.52; 95% CI 2.234-94.351; p = 0.005) and the crural cistern (OR = 4.90; 95% CI 1.359-17.678; p = 0.015) were associated with unfavorable outcomes. Postoperative effacement of the crural cistern was the strongest predictor of 6-month mortality (OR = 8.93; 95% CI 2.747-29.054; p = 0.000).

CONCLUSIONS

Hemispheric hypodensity and effacement of the crural and ambient cisterns on postoperative CT after primary DC seems to associate with poor outcome in patients with TBI.

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 Role of Decompressive Craniectomy in the Context of Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: Summary of Results and Analysis of the Confidence Level of Conclusions From Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

Introduction: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a global epidemic. The incidence of TBI in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) is three times greater than in high-income countries (HICs). Decompressive craniectomy (DC) is a surgical procedure to reduce intracranial pressure (ICP) and prevent secondary injury. Multiple comparative studies, and several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted to investigate the influence of DC for patients with severe TBI on outcomes such as mortality, ICP, neurological outcomes, and intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay. The results of these studies are inconsistent. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses have been conducted in an effort to aggregate the data from the individual studies, and perhaps derive reliable conclusions. The purpose of this project was to conduct a review of the reviews about the effectiveness of DC to improve outcomes.

Methods: We conducted a systematic search of the literature to identify reviews and meta-analyses that met our pre-determined criteria. We used the AMSTAR 2 instrument to assess the quality of each of the included reviews, and determine the level of confidence.

Results: Of 973 citations from the original search, five publications were included in our review. Four of them included meta-analyses. For mortality, three reviews found a positive effect of DC compared to medical management and two found no significant difference between groups. The four reviews that measured neurological outcome found no benefit of DC. The two reviews that assessed ICP both found DC to be beneficial in reducing ICP. DC demonstrated a significant reduction in ICU length of stay in the one study that measured it, and a significant reduction in hospital length of stay in the two studies that measured it. According to the AMSTAR 2 criteria, the five reviews ranged in levels of confidence from low to critically low.

Conclusion: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are important approaches for aggregating information from multiple studies. Clinicians rely of these methods for concise interpretation of scientific literature. Standards for quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses have been established to support the quality of the reviews being produced. In the case of DC, more attention must be paid to quality standards, in the generation of both individual studies and reviews.

Early and late clinical outcomes after decompressive craniectomy for traumatic refractory intracranial hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis of current evidence

INTRODUCTION

Decompressive craniectomy (DC) to control refractory intracranial hypertension in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI), has been listed as possible but controversial therapeutic approach in the latest version of TBI management guidelines. This study aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on efficacy and safety of DC compared to standard care in TBI patients.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A database search from 2011 to 2017 was conducted to identify studies pertinent to DC compared to standard care after TBI. The primary outcomes were mortality and functional outcome upon hospital discharge and at 6 and 12 months after intervention, whereas secondary outcomes were intracranial pressure (ICP) control, hospitalization data and occurrence of adverse events.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Three randomized controlled trials and two observational studies enrolling 3451 patients were selected for qualitative analysis, among which four were included in the meta-analysis. DC-treated patients showed a significant reduction of overall mortality (RR, 0.57; 95% CI: 0.5-0.66; P<0.001; I2=17%) with no profound beneficial effect on functional outcome (RR, 0.89; 95% CI: 0.78-1.02; P=0.09; I2=58%) compared to those receiving standard care. A more efficient ICP reduction and a tendency towards shorter duration of hospitalization were recorded in DC versus standard care group. Adverse events are more common in DC-treated patients.

CONCLUSIONS

It seems that, in TBI patients with intracranial hypertension, the use of DC is associated with survival benefit when compared to medical therapy alone, but with no clear improvement of functional outcome. Yet no definite conclusion can be drawn due to limited quantity and considerable heterogeneity of available data.

The currency, completeness and quality of systematic reviews of acute management of moderate to severe traumatic brain injury: A comprehensive evidence map

OBJECTIVE

To appraise the currency, completeness and quality of evidence from systematic reviews (SRs) of acute management of moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (TBI).

METHODS

We conducted comprehensive searches to March 2016 for published, English-language SRs and RCTs of acute management of moderate to severe TBI. Systematic reviews and RCTs were grouped under 12 broad intervention categories. For each review, we mapped the included and non-included RCTs, noting the reasons why RCTs were omitted. An SR was judged as 'current' when it included the most recently published RCT we found on their topic, and 'complete' when it included every RCT we found that met its inclusion criteria, taking account of when the review was conducted. Quality was assessed using the AMSTAR checklist (trichotomised into low, moderate and high quality).

FINDINGS

We included 85 SRs and 213 RCTs examining the effectiveness of treatments for acute management of moderate to severe TBI. The most frequently reviewed interventions were hypothermia (n = 17, 14.2%), hypertonic saline and/or mannitol (n = 9, 7.5%) and surgery (n = 8, 6.7%). Of the 80 single-intervention SRs, approximately half (n = 44, 55%) were judged as current and two-thirds (n = 52, 65.0%) as complete. When considering only the most recently published review on each intervention (n = 25), currency increased to 72.0% (n = 18). Less than half of the 85 SRs were judged as high quality (n = 38, 44.7%), and nearly 20% were low quality (n = 16, 18.8%). Only 16 (20.0%) of the single-intervention reviews (and none of the five multi-intervention reviews) were judged as current, complete and high-quality. These included reviews of red blood cell transfusion, hypothermia, management guided by intracranial pressure, pharmacological agents (various) and prehospital intubation. Over three-quarters (n = 167, 78.4%) of the 213 RCTs were included in one or more SR. Of the remainder, 17 (8.0%) RCTs post-dated or were out of scope of existing SRs, and 29 (13.6%) were on interventions that have not been assessed in SRs.

CONCLUSION

A substantial number of SRs in acute management of moderate to severe TBI lack currency, completeness and quality. We have identified both potential evidence gaps and also substantial research waste. Novel review methods, such as Living Systematic Reviews, may ameliorate these shortcomings and enhance utility and reliability of the evidence underpinning clinical care.

Decompressive Craniectomy for Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

Systematic review of the literature to evaluate the role of decompressive craniectomy (DC) after severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), comparing the first major randomized clinical trial on this topic (DECRA) with subsequent literature.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed from 2011 to 2015. Citations were selected using the following inclusion criteria: closed severe TBI and DC. Exclusion criteria included most patients ≤18 years old, ≤20 participants, review articles, DC for reasons other than TBI, or surgical procedures other than DC. Primary outcomes included mortality and Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) at discharge, 6 months, and 1 year after injury. Assessment of risk of bias of the randomized controlled trials was also performed.

RESULTS

Only 12 of 5528 articles satisfied the eligibility criteria; of these studies, 3 were randomized controlled trials. DC in specific populations does not offer GOS or mortality advantages compared with medical treatment; on the other hand, when DC with open dural flap was compared with an alternative means of decompression, e.g., DC with multiple dural stabs, the latter showed significant advantage in mortality and GOS. Nonrandomized studies showed decreased mortality and increased GOS in patients aged ≤50 years when DC was performed <5 hours after TBI and with Glasgow Coma Scale score >5.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study underscores the importance of continued international prospective data collection for assessing types of surgical interventions in addition to DC and their timing in patients who have severe TBI. In addition, in geographic areas with limited access to advanced medical treatment for severe TBI, DC is of benefit when performed <5 hours after injury in younger patients with Glasgow Coma Scale >5.