Tapper Julius, Skrifvars Markus B, Kivisaari Riku, Siironen Jari, Raj Rahul
Department of Neurosurgery, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Department of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, Division of Intensive Care, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Surg Neurol Int. 2017 Jul 11;8:141. doi: 10.4103/sni.sni_453_16. eCollection 2017.
The role of decompressive craniectomy in treating raised intracranial pressure (ICP) after traumatic brain injuries (TBI) is controversial. The aim of this study was to assess the differences in prognosis of patients initially treated by decompressive craniectomy, craniotomy, or conservatively.
We conducted a single-center retrospective study on adult blunt TBI patients admitted to a neurosurgical intensive care unit during 2009-2012. Patients were divided into three groups based on their initial treatment - decompressive craniectomy, craniotomy, and conservative. Primary outcome was 6-month Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) dichotomized to favorable outcome (independent) and unfavorable outcome (dependent). The association between initial treatment and outcome was assessed using a logistic regression model adjusting for case-mix using known predictors of outcome.
Of the 822 included patients, 58 patients were in the craniectomy group, 401 patients in the craniotomy group, and 363 patients in the conservatively treated group. Overall, 6-month unfavorable outcome was 48%. After adjusting for case-mix, patients in the decompressive craniectomy group had a statistical significantly higher risk for poor neurological outcome compared to patients in the conservative group (OR 3.06, 95% CI 1.45-6.42) and craniotomy group (OR 3.61, 95% CI 1.74-7.51).
In conclusion, patients requiring primary decompressive craniectomy had a higher risk for poor neurological outcome compared to patients undergoing craniotomy or were conservatively treated. It is plausible that the poor prognosis is related to the TBI severity itself rather than the intervention. Further prospective randomized trials are required to establish the role of decompressive craniectomy in the treatment of patients with TBI.
减压性颅骨切除术在治疗创伤性脑损伤(TBI)后颅内压(ICP)升高方面的作用存在争议。本研究的目的是评估最初接受减压性颅骨切除术、开颅手术或保守治疗的患者在预后方面的差异。
我们对2009年至2012年期间入住神经外科重症监护病房的成年钝性TBI患者进行了单中心回顾性研究。根据患者的初始治疗方法将其分为三组——减压性颅骨切除术组、开颅手术组和保守治疗组。主要结局是将6个月的格拉斯哥预后量表(GOS)分为良好结局(独立)和不良结局(依赖)。使用逻辑回归模型评估初始治疗与结局之间的关联,并使用已知的结局预测因素对病例组合进行调整。
在纳入的822例患者中,颅骨切除术组有58例患者,开颅手术组有401例患者,保守治疗组有363例患者。总体而言,6个月时的不良结局为48%。在对病例组合进行调整后,与保守治疗组(比值比3.06,95%置信区间1.45 - 6.42)和开颅手术组(比值比3.61,95%置信区间1.74 - 7.51)相比,减压性颅骨切除术组患者神经功能预后不良的风险在统计学上显著更高。
总之,与接受开颅手术或保守治疗的患者相比,需要进行初次减压性颅骨切除术的患者神经功能预后不良的风险更高。预后不良可能与TBI的严重程度本身而非干预措施有关。需要进一步的前瞻性随机试验来确定减压性颅骨切除术在TBI患者治疗中的作用。