• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

重新审视减压性颅骨切除术中线内侧缘距离作为计算创伤性脑积水风险的指标。

Re-examining decompressive craniectomy medial margin distance from midline as a metric for calculating the risk of post-traumatic hydrocephalus.

机构信息

Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Washington, 325 Ninth Ave, Box 359924, Seattle, WA 98104, USA.

Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Washington, 325 Ninth Ave, Box 359924, Seattle, WA 98104, USA.

出版信息

J Clin Neurosci. 2021 May;87:125-131. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2021.02.025. Epub 2021 Mar 20.

DOI:10.1016/j.jocn.2021.02.025
PMID:33863519
Abstract

Decompressive craniectomy (DC) is a life-saving procedure in severe traumatic brain injury, but is associated with higher rates of post-traumatic hydrocephalus (PTH). The relationship between the medial craniectomy margin's proximity to midline and frequency of developing PTH is controversial. The primary study objective was to determine whether average medial craniectomy margin distance from midline was closer to midline in patients who developed PTH after DC for severe TBI compared to patients that did not. The secondary objective was to determine if a threshold distance from midline could be identified, at which the risk of developing PTH increased if the DC was performed closer to midline than this threshold. A retrospective review was performed of 380 patients undergoing DC at a single institution between March 2004 and November 2014. Clinical, operative and demographic variables were collected, including age, sex, DC parameters and occurrence of PTH. Statistical analysis compared mean axial craniectomy margin distance from midline in patients with versus without PTH. Distances from midline were tested as potential thresholds. No significant difference was identified in mean axial craniectomy margin distance from midline in patients developing PTH compared with patients with no PTH (n = 24, 12.8 mm versus n = 356, 16.6 mm respectively, p = 0.086). No significant cutoff distance from midline was identified (n = 212, p = 0.201). This study, the largest to date, was unable to identify a threshold with sufficient discrimination to support clinical recommendations in terms of DC margins with regard to midline, including thresholds reportedly significant in previously published research.

摘要

去骨瓣减压术(DC)是严重创伤性脑损伤的一种救生程序,但与更高的创伤后脑积水(PTH)发生率有关。中线附近的内侧颅骨切除术边缘与发生 PTH 的频率之间的关系存在争议。主要研究目的是确定在接受 DC 治疗严重 TBI 后发生 PTH 的患者中,平均内侧颅骨切除术边缘距离中线是否比未发生 PTH 的患者更接近中线。次要目标是确定是否可以确定一个中线距离阈值,如果 DC 更接近中线,则发生 PTH 的风险会增加。对 2004 年 3 月至 2014 年 11 月在一家机构接受 DC 的 380 例患者进行了回顾性审查。收集了临床、手术和人口统计学变量,包括年龄、性别、DC 参数和 PTH 的发生。统计分析比较了有和无 PTH 的患者中线轴向颅骨切除术边缘的平均距离。从中线测试距离作为潜在的阈值。与无 PTH 的患者相比,发生 PTH 的患者中线轴向颅骨切除术边缘的平均距离无显著差异(n=24,12.8mm 与 n=356,16.6mm,p=0.086)。未确定从中线的显著距离阈值(n=212,p=0.201)。这项迄今为止最大的研究,无法确定一个具有足够区分力的阈值,以支持关于 DC 边缘的中线的临床建议,包括以前发表的研究中报道的有意义的阈值。

相似文献

1
Re-examining decompressive craniectomy medial margin distance from midline as a metric for calculating the risk of post-traumatic hydrocephalus.重新审视减压性颅骨切除术中线内侧缘距离作为计算创伤性脑积水风险的指标。
J Clin Neurosci. 2021 May;87:125-131. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2021.02.025. Epub 2021 Mar 20.
2
Factors associated with the development and outcome of hydrocephalus after decompressive craniectomy for traumatic brain injury.创伤性脑损伤去骨瓣减压术后脑积水发生和结局的相关因素。
Neurosurg Rev. 2021 Feb;44(1):471-478. doi: 10.1007/s10143-019-01179-0. Epub 2020 Jan 17.
3
Risk factors for post-traumatic hydrocephalus following decompressive craniectomy.去骨瓣减压术后创伤后脑积水的危险因素。
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2018 Sep;160(9):1691-1698. doi: 10.1007/s00701-018-3639-0. Epub 2018 Jul 27.
4
Factors associated with shunt-dependent hydrocephalus after decompressive craniectomy for traumatic brain injury.创伤性脑损伤去骨瓣减压术后与分流依赖性脑积水相关的因素。
J Neurosurg. 2018 May;128(5):1547-1552. doi: 10.3171/2017.1.JNS162721. Epub 2017 Jun 16.
5
Decompressive craniectomy, interhemispheric hygroma and hydrocephalus: a timeline of events?减压性颅骨切除术、大脑半球间脑脊膜膨出和脑积水:事件时间线?
Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2013 Aug;115(8):1308-12. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2012.12.011. Epub 2013 Jan 3.
6
Postoperative complications influencing the long-term outcome of head-injured patients after decompressive craniectomy.术后并发症影响颅脑损伤患者去骨瓣减压术后的长期预后。
Brain Behav. 2019 Jan;9(1):e01179. doi: 10.1002/brb3.1179. Epub 2018 Dec 4.
7
Posttraumatic Hydrocephalus after Decompressive Craniectomy in 126 Patients with Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.126例重度创伤性脑损伤患者行去骨瓣减压术后的创伤后脑积水
J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg. 2016 Mar;77(2):88-92. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1558411. Epub 2015 Sep 9.
8
Risk Factors Predicting Posttraumatic Hydrocephalus After Decompressive Craniectomy in Traumatic Brain Injury.预测创伤性脑损伤减压性颅骨切除术后创伤后脑积水的危险因素
World Neurosurg. 2018 Aug;116:e406-e413. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2018.04.216. Epub 2018 May 9.
9
Risk factors for the development of posttraumatic hydrocephalus after unilateral decompressive craniectomy in patients with traumatic brain injury.创伤性脑损伤患者单侧去骨瓣减压术后创伤后脑积水发生的危险因素。
J Clin Neurosci. 2019 May;63:62-67. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2019.02.006. Epub 2019 Mar 1.
10
Cisternostomy is not beneficial to reduce the occurrence of post-traumatic hydrocephalus in Traumatic Brain Injury.经蝶窦入路视神经减压术不能降低颅脑创伤后发生脑积水的风险。
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2024 Apr 30;166(1):200. doi: 10.1007/s00701-024-06084-0.

引用本文的文献

1
Post-traumatic hydrocephalus after decompressive craniectomy: a multidimensional analysis of clinical, radiological, and surgical risk factors.减压性颅骨切除术后创伤性脑积水:临床、影像学和手术风险因素的多维度分析
Neurosurg Rev. 2025 Jun 21;48(1):523. doi: 10.1007/s10143-025-03673-0.
2
Post-craniectomy hydrocephalus in adult traumatic brain injury patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of risk factors and outcome.成人创伤性脑损伤患者颅骨切除术后脑积水:危险因素及预后的系统评价和荟萃分析
Neurosurg Rev. 2025 Jan 22;48(1):72. doi: 10.1007/s10143-025-03232-7.