Goulin Lippi Fernandes Eric, Ridwan Sami, Greeve Isabell, Schäbitz Wolf-Rüdiger, Grote Alexander, Simon Matthias
Department of Neurosurgery, Evangelisches Klinikum Bethel, University Hospital OWL, University Bielefeld, Campus Bielefeld-Bethel, Bielefeld, Germany.
Department of Neurosurgery, Klinikum Ibbenbüren, Ibbenbüren, Germany.
Front Neurol. 2022 May 12;13:840212. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2022.840212. eCollection 2022.
Surgical decompression of the posterior fossa is often performed in cases with a space-occupying cerebellar infarction to prevent coma and death. In this study, we analyzed our institutional experience with this condition. We specifically attempted to address timing issues and investigated the role of cerebellar necrosectomy using imaging data and conducting volumetric analyses.
We retrospectively studied pertinent clinical and imaging data, including computerized volumetric analyses (preoperative/postoperative infarction volume, necrosectomy volume, and posterior fossa volume), from all 49 patients who underwent posterior fossa decompression surgery for cerebellar infarction in our department from January 2012 to January 2021.
Thirty-five (71%) patients had a Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) of 14-15 at admission vs. only 14 (29%) before vs. 41 (84%) following surgery. Seven (14%) patients had preventive surgery (initial GCS 14-15, preoperative GCS change ≤ 1). Only 18 (37%) patients had an mRS score of 0-3 at discharge. Estimated overall survival was 70.5% at 1 year. Interestingly, 18/20 (90%) surviving cases had a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) outcome of 0-3 (mRS 0-2: 12/20 [60%]) 1 year after surgery. Surgical timing, including preventive surgery and mass effect of the infarct, in the posterior fossa assessed semi-quantitatively (Kirollos grade) and with volumetric parameters that were not predictive of the patients' (functional) outcomes.
Posterior fossa decompression for cerebellar infarction is a life-saving procedure, but rapid recovery of the GCS after surgery does not necessarily translate into good functional outcome. Many patients died during follow-up, but long-term mRS outcomes of 4-5 are rare. Surgery should probably aim primarily at pressure relief, and our clinical as well as volumetric data suggest that the impact of removing an infarcted tissue may be limited. It is presumably relatively safe to initially withhold surgery in cases with a GCS of 14-15.
对于有占位性小脑梗死的病例,常进行后颅窝减压手术以预防昏迷和死亡。在本研究中,我们分析了我院处理这种情况的经验。我们特别试图解决时机问题,并利用影像学数据和进行体积分析来研究小脑坏死组织切除术的作用。
我们回顾性研究了2012年1月至2021年1月期间在我院因小脑梗死接受后颅窝减压手术的49例患者的相关临床和影像学数据,包括计算机化体积分析(术前/术后梗死体积、坏死组织切除体积和后颅窝体积)。
35例(71%)患者入院时格拉斯哥昏迷量表(GCS)评分为14 - 15分,术前仅14例(29%),术后为41例(84%)。7例(14%)患者接受了预防性手术(初始GCS 14 - 15分,术前GCS变化≤1)。出院时仅18例(37%)患者改良Rankin量表(mRS)评分为0 - 3分。1年时估计总生存率为70.5%。有趣的是,术后1年,20例存活病例中有18例(90%)改良Rankin量表(mRS)结果为0 - 3分(mRS 0 - 2分:12/20 [60%])。后颅窝手术时机,包括预防性手术和梗死灶的占位效应,通过半定量(基罗洛斯分级)和体积参数评估,这些参数并不能预测患者的(功能)结局。
小脑梗死的后颅窝减压是一种挽救生命的手术,但术后GCS的快速恢复不一定转化为良好的功能结局。许多患者在随访期间死亡,但长期mRS结果为4 - 5分的情况很少见。手术可能主要应以减压为目标,我们的临床和体积数据表明,切除梗死组织的影响可能有限。对于GCS评分为14 - 15分的病例,最初暂不进行手术可能相对安全。