TY - JOUR
T1 - Primary or secondary decompressive craniectomy
T2 - Different indication and outcome
AU - Al-Jishi, Ahmed
AU - Saluja, Rajeet
AU - Al-Jehani, Hosam
AU - Lamoureux, Julie
AU - Maleki, Mohammad
AU - Marcoux, Judith
N1 - Copyright:
Copyright 2017 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2011/7/1
Y1 - 2011/7/1
N2 - Background: Intracranial hypertension can cause secondary damage after a traumatic brain injury. Aggressive medical management might not be sufficient to alleviate the increasing intracranial pressure (ICP), and decompressive craniectomy (DC) can be considered. Decompressive craniectomy can be divided into categories, according to the timing and rationale for performing the procedure: primary (done at the time of mass lesion evacuation) and secondary craniectomy (done to treat refractory ICP). Most studies analyze primary and secondary DC together. Our hypothesis is that these two groups are distinct and the aim of this retrospective study is to evaluate the differences in order to better predict outcome after DC. Methods: Seventy patients had DC over a period of four years at our center. They were divided into two groups based on the timing of the DC. Primary DC (44 patients) was done within 24 hours of the injury for mass lesion evacuation. Secondary DC (26 patients) was done after 24 hours and purely for the treatment of refractory ICP. Pre-op characteristics and post-op outcomes were compared between the two groups. Results: There was a significant difference in the mechanism of injury, the pupil abnormalities and Marshall grade between primary and secondary DC. There was also a significant difference in outcome with primary DC showing 45.5% good outcome and 40.9% mortality and secondary DC showing 73.1% good outcome and 15.4% mortality. Conclusions: Primary and secondary DC have different indications and patients characteristics. Outcome prediction following DC should be adjusted according to the surgical indication.
AB - Background: Intracranial hypertension can cause secondary damage after a traumatic brain injury. Aggressive medical management might not be sufficient to alleviate the increasing intracranial pressure (ICP), and decompressive craniectomy (DC) can be considered. Decompressive craniectomy can be divided into categories, according to the timing and rationale for performing the procedure: primary (done at the time of mass lesion evacuation) and secondary craniectomy (done to treat refractory ICP). Most studies analyze primary and secondary DC together. Our hypothesis is that these two groups are distinct and the aim of this retrospective study is to evaluate the differences in order to better predict outcome after DC. Methods: Seventy patients had DC over a period of four years at our center. They were divided into two groups based on the timing of the DC. Primary DC (44 patients) was done within 24 hours of the injury for mass lesion evacuation. Secondary DC (26 patients) was done after 24 hours and purely for the treatment of refractory ICP. Pre-op characteristics and post-op outcomes were compared between the two groups. Results: There was a significant difference in the mechanism of injury, the pupil abnormalities and Marshall grade between primary and secondary DC. There was also a significant difference in outcome with primary DC showing 45.5% good outcome and 40.9% mortality and secondary DC showing 73.1% good outcome and 15.4% mortality. Conclusions: Primary and secondary DC have different indications and patients characteristics. Outcome prediction following DC should be adjusted according to the surgical indication.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80053329043&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80053329043&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1017/S0317167100012154
DO - 10.1017/S0317167100012154
M3 - Article
C2 - 21672701
AN - SCOPUS:80053329043
SN - 0317-1671
VL - 38
SP - 612
EP - 620
JO - Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences
JF - Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences
IS - 4
ER -