Download PDF
Indian Journal of Neurotrauma 2011; 08(01): 7-9
DOI: 10.1016/S0973-0508(11)80017-1
Original article
Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd.

Cranioplasty as a surrogate marker for excellent outcome in severe head injury

Shejoy P Joshua
,
Deepak Agrawal
,
GD Satyarthee
,
D Gupta
,
S Sinha
Subject Editor:
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
05 April 2017 (online)

Also available at
  PDF Download  Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Outcome in severe head injury is difficult to assess due to lack of follow up. Operated patients who return for cranioplasty usually have the best outcome. The aim of this study was to assess outcome following severe head injury using cranioplasty as a surrogate marker. This was a retrospective study carried out from November 2008 to March 2010. All patients with severe head injury who underwent decompressive craniectomy (DC) or cranioplasty in the study period were included. Case records, imaging and follow up visit data from all patients were reviewed. Glasgow Coma Score on admission and Glasgow Outcome Score at discharge were assessed.

Of the 273 patients, 84.25% (n=230) were male and 15.75% (n=43) were female. The mean age was 34.3 years (range 2–81 years SD 16.817). The mean GCS on admission was 5.615 (range 3–8, SD 1.438). The in-hospital mortality was 54% (n=149). GOS of 4 or 5 at discharge was attained in 22% (n=60) patients. Sixty five patients returned for cranioplasty during follow up. The M:F ratio (6.2:1) matched with the study cohort. However, the difference in mean age (28.815 years SD 13.396) and mean GCS on first admission of 6.323 (SD 1.393) were statistical significant. Therefore, at the very minimum, 65 patients (24%) of the study cohort had excellent outcome. In operated severe head injury patients significant number of patients (24% in our study) have excellent outcome. Also, cranioplasty can serve as a useful marker to assess outcome of operated severe head injury patients in an institution.

Keywords

cranioplasty - outcome - severe head injury
 

  • References

  • 1 Bruns Jr J, Hauser WA. The epidemiology of traumatic brain injury: a review. Epilepsia 2003; 44 (Suppl. 10) 2-10
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Fleminger S, Ponsford J. Long term outcome after traumatic brain injury. BMJ 2005; 331: 1419-1420
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Hoffman K, Primack A, Keusch G, Hrynkow S. Addressing the growing burden of trauma and injury in low- and middleincome countries. Am J Public Health 2005; 95: 13-17
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Basso A, Previglino I, Durate JM, Ferrari N. Advances in management of Neurological trauma in different continents. World J Surg 2001; 25: 1174-1178
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Jennett B, Bond M. Assessment of outcome after severe brain damage. Lancet 1975; i: 480-484
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Brain Trauma Foundation (US) AAoNS. Management and prognosis of severe traumatic brain injury. New York: 2000.
    PubMed
  • 7 Hukkelhoven CW, Steyerberg EW, Rampen AJ. et al Patient age and outcome following severe traumatic brain injury: an analysis of 5600 patients. J Neurosurg 2003; 99: 666-673
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Lemcke J, Ahmadi S, Meier U. Outcome of Patients with Severe Head Injury After Decompressive Craniectomy. In, Zbigniew Czernicki (Ed) Brain Edema XIV. Acta Neurochirurgica Supplementum 2010; 106: 231-233
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Signorini DF, Andrews PJD, Jones PA, Wardlaw JM, Miller JD. Predicting survival using simple clinical variables: a case study in traumatic brain injury. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1999; 66: 20-25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Marshall LF, Gautille T. Klauber. et al The outcome of severe closed head injury. J Neurosurg 1991; 75: S28-S36
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar