Hydrocephalus Renders Ventricular or Subarachnoid Drainage as an Efficacies Cure for Decompressive Craniectomy-Induced Subdural Effusion After Traumatic Brain Injury.
Huaping Huang, Yang Chen, Wanglu Hu, Shidi Yang, Haijian Wu, Liansheng Gao, Wei Yan
{"title":"Hydrocephalus Renders Ventricular or Subarachnoid Drainage as an Efficacies Cure for Decompressive Craniectomy-Induced Subdural Effusion After Traumatic Brain Injury.","authors":"Huaping Huang, Yang Chen, Wanglu Hu, Shidi Yang, Haijian Wu, Liansheng Gao, Wei Yan","doi":"10.1097/SCS.0000000000010819","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients with decompressive craniectomy (DC) frequently accompany the complication of secondary subdural effusion (SDE). In cases where cranioplasty is contraindicated, there are no clear-cut guidelines on surgical approaches for managing subdural effusion resulting from DC. Therefore, the authors conducted this study to compare different surgical procedures for patients with SDE in the context of contraindications for cranioplasty.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The clinical data of 59 patients with SDE following DC for TBI, who had contraindication of cranioplasty and received surgical treatment for SDE, were retrospectively selected from January 2010 to June 2023. The therapeutic efficacy of SDE was assessed based on the dynamic head CT scans performed within 1 month after surgery and the improvement of clinical symptoms. The authors compared the effects of ventricular or subarachnoid drainage (VSD, n = 33) and subdural drainage (SDD, n = 29), which, respectively, serve as CSF of control and direct diversion. Subgroup analysis also considered the presence or absence of hydrocephalus and the associated risk.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study found that VSD group exhibited superior therapeutic effects compared with SDD group. (75.8% versus 38.4%; P =0.004), with no significant difference in complication ( P =0.543). Subgroup analysis indicates that patients with hydrocephalus who directly received VSD had better treatment effect than SDD (93.3% versus 11.1%, P <0.001), while for patients without hydrocephalus, there was no significant difference between the VSD group and the SDD group (61.1% versus 52.9%, P =0.442). Furthermore, in patients without hydrocephalus but at risk of hydrocephalus, the therapeutic effects of VSD were superior to those of SDD(100% versus 14%, P <0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study reveal that VSD could be considered first compare to SDD for SDE patients with contraindications to cranioplastyt, especially when patients have a hydrocephalus or risk factors for hydrocephalus.</p>","PeriodicalId":15462,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Craniofacial Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"1649-1654"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Craniofacial Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000010819","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients with decompressive craniectomy (DC) frequently accompany the complication of secondary subdural effusion (SDE). In cases where cranioplasty is contraindicated, there are no clear-cut guidelines on surgical approaches for managing subdural effusion resulting from DC. Therefore, the authors conducted this study to compare different surgical procedures for patients with SDE in the context of contraindications for cranioplasty.
Methods: The clinical data of 59 patients with SDE following DC for TBI, who had contraindication of cranioplasty and received surgical treatment for SDE, were retrospectively selected from January 2010 to June 2023. The therapeutic efficacy of SDE was assessed based on the dynamic head CT scans performed within 1 month after surgery and the improvement of clinical symptoms. The authors compared the effects of ventricular or subarachnoid drainage (VSD, n = 33) and subdural drainage (SDD, n = 29), which, respectively, serve as CSF of control and direct diversion. Subgroup analysis also considered the presence or absence of hydrocephalus and the associated risk.
Results: This study found that VSD group exhibited superior therapeutic effects compared with SDD group. (75.8% versus 38.4%; P =0.004), with no significant difference in complication ( P =0.543). Subgroup analysis indicates that patients with hydrocephalus who directly received VSD had better treatment effect than SDD (93.3% versus 11.1%, P <0.001), while for patients without hydrocephalus, there was no significant difference between the VSD group and the SDD group (61.1% versus 52.9%, P =0.442). Furthermore, in patients without hydrocephalus but at risk of hydrocephalus, the therapeutic effects of VSD were superior to those of SDD(100% versus 14%, P <0.001).
Conclusion: Our study reveal that VSD could be considered first compare to SDD for SDE patients with contraindications to cranioplastyt, especially when patients have a hydrocephalus or risk factors for hydrocephalus.
目的:外伤性脑损伤(TBI)行颅骨减压术(DC)患者常伴有继发性硬膜下积液(SDE)并发症。在颅成形术禁忌的情况下,对于处理DC引起的硬膜下积液的手术方法没有明确的指导方针。因此,作者进行了这项研究,以比较在颅成形术禁忌症背景下SDE患者的不同手术方法。方法:回顾性分析2010年1月至2023年6月59例TBI DC术后SDE患者的临床资料,这些患者均有颅骨成形术禁忌症并接受了SDE手术治疗。根据术后1个月内头部CT动态扫描及临床症状改善情况评估SDE治疗效果。作者比较了脑室或蛛网膜下腔引流(VSD, n = 33)和硬膜下引流(SDD, n = 29)分别作为对照脑脊液和直接分流脑脊液的效果。亚组分析还考虑了脑积水的存在与否以及相关的风险。结果:本研究发现VSD组治疗效果优于SDD组。(75.8%对38.4%;P=0.004),并发症发生率差异无统计学意义(P=0.543)。亚组分析显示,直接接受VSD治疗的脑积水患者的治疗效果优于SDD (93.3% vs 11.1%)。结论:我们的研究表明,对于有颅骨成形术禁忌的SDE患者,尤其是有脑积水或有脑积水危险因素的患者,可以优先考虑VSD而不是SDD。
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Craniofacial Surgery serves as a forum of communication for all those involved in craniofacial surgery, maxillofacial surgery and pediatric plastic surgery. Coverage ranges from practical aspects of craniofacial surgery to the basic science that underlies surgical practice. The journal publishes original articles, scientific reviews, editorials and invited commentary, abstracts and selected articles from international journals, and occasional international bibliographies in craniofacial surgery.