Young Michael, Putty Matthew, Finneran Megan M, Johnson Ryan, Schaible Keith, Farhat Hamad
Neurological Surgery, Advocate Health Care, Oak Lawn, USA.
Neurological Surgery, Advocate Health Care, Normal, USA.
Cureus. 2020 Mar 24;12(3):e7388. doi: 10.7759/cureus.7388.
Introduction Penetrating head injuries (PHIs) can have diverse presentations and mechanisms; therefore, treatment methods have not been clearly outlined. Vascular injury is common and foreign body removal is often required. We present three cases to illustrate low-velocity nonmissile penetrating head injuries (NPHIs) and discuss a multidisciplinary approach. Methods We present a case series from our institution that illustrates the importance of multidisciplinary treatment of these injuries. All injuries are low- velocity NPHIs with separate mechanisms and anatomical locations. Results Multidisciplinary management involving neurosurgery, otolaryngology, and neuroendovascular surgery is represented in our case series with all patients having good clinical outcomes. Our first case is a 34-year-old male who presented neurologically intact after a stabbing in the left temporal region with concerns for external carotid artery injury and maxillary sinus injury. Our second case is a 37-year-old male who presented with a self-inflicted nail gun injury that penetrated the right temporal bone, right temporal lobe, bilateral sphenoid sinus, and left petrous carotid canal with concerns of petrous internal carotid injury. Our third case is a 31-year-old male who presented after an accidental nail gun injury that penetrated through the oral cavity, hard palate, and left sphenoid sinus and ending in the left cavernous sinus with concerns of cavernous internal carotid injury. Conclusion Careful consideration must be taken when evaluating low-velocity NPHIs. Particular attention must be given when an associated vascular injury is suspected. Our case series highlights the importance of a multidisciplinary approach in achieving good clinical outcomes in PHIs.
引言 穿透性颅脑损伤(PHIs)可有多种表现形式和机制;因此,治疗方法尚未明确界定。血管损伤很常见,通常需要取出异物。我们报告三例低速非投射物穿透性颅脑损伤(NPHIs)病例,以说明情况并讨论多学科治疗方法。方法 我们展示了本院的一组病例,以说明对这些损伤进行多学科治疗的重要性。所有损伤均为低速NPHIs,机制和解剖位置各不相同。结果 我们的病例系列体现了神经外科、耳鼻喉科和神经血管内外科的多学科管理,所有患者临床结局良好。我们的第一例是一名34岁男性,左颞部刺伤后神经功能完好,担心有颈外动脉损伤和上颌窦损伤。第二例是一名37岁男性,因自制射钉枪伤就诊,射钉枪穿透右侧颞骨、右侧颞叶、双侧蝶窦和左侧岩骨颈动脉管,担心岩骨段颈内动脉损伤。第三例是一名31岁男性,意外射钉枪伤后就诊,射钉枪穿过口腔、硬腭和左侧蝶窦,止于左侧海绵窦,担心海绵窦段颈内动脉损伤。结论 评估低速NPHIs时必须谨慎考虑。怀疑有相关血管损伤时必须格外注意。我们的病例系列突出了多学科方法在PHIs中取得良好临床结局的重要性。