Does the Timing of the Surgery Have a Major Role in Influencing the Outcome in Elders with Acute Subdural Hematomas?
ASDH
brain
elderly
hemmorrage
neurosurgery
surgical timing
Journal
Journal of personalized medicine
ISSN: 2075-4426
Titre abrégé: J Pers Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101602269
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
30 Sep 2022
30 Sep 2022
Historique:
received:
18
08
2022
revised:
19
09
2022
accepted:
23
09
2022
entrez:
27
10
2022
pubmed:
28
10
2022
medline:
28
10
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The incidence of traumatic acute subdural hematomas (ASDH) in the elderly is increasing. Despite surgical evacuation, these patients have poor survival and low rate of functional outcome, and surgical timing plays no clear role as a predictor. We investigated whether the timing of surgery had a major role in influencing the outcome in these patients. We retrospectively retrieved clinical and radiological data of all patients ≥70 years operated on for post-traumatic ASDH in a 3 year period in five Italian hospitals. Patients were divided into three surgical timing groups from hospital arrival: We included 136 patients. About 33% died as a result of the consequences of ASDH and among the survivors, only 24% were in good functional outcome at discharge. Surgical timing groups appeared different according to presenting the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GCS), which was on average lower in the An earlier surgery was offered to patients with worse clinical-radiological findings. Additionally, after stratification for GCS, it was not associated with better outcome. Among the radiological markers, preoperative midline shift was the strongest outcome predictor.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The incidence of traumatic acute subdural hematomas (ASDH) in the elderly is increasing. Despite surgical evacuation, these patients have poor survival and low rate of functional outcome, and surgical timing plays no clear role as a predictor. We investigated whether the timing of surgery had a major role in influencing the outcome in these patients.
METHODS
METHODS
We retrospectively retrieved clinical and radiological data of all patients ≥70 years operated on for post-traumatic ASDH in a 3 year period in five Italian hospitals. Patients were divided into three surgical timing groups from hospital arrival:
RESULTS
RESULTS
We included 136 patients. About 33% died as a result of the consequences of ASDH and among the survivors, only 24% were in good functional outcome at discharge. Surgical timing groups appeared different according to presenting the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GCS), which was on average lower in the
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
An earlier surgery was offered to patients with worse clinical-radiological findings. Additionally, after stratification for GCS, it was not associated with better outcome. Among the radiological markers, preoperative midline shift was the strongest outcome predictor.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36294751
pii: jpm12101612
doi: 10.3390/jpm12101612
pmc: PMC9604688
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
Neurosurg Focus. 2017 Nov;43(5):E10
pubmed: 29088952
J Neurotrauma. 2012 Dec 10;29(18):2723-6
pubmed: 22873699
Am Surg. 2021 Mar;87(3):347-353
pubmed: 32972240
World Neurosurg. 2017 May;101:677-685.e2
pubmed: 28315797
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 1993;121(3-4):95-9
pubmed: 8512021
World Neurosurg. 2012 Sep-Oct;78(3-4):306-11
pubmed: 22120569
Lancet Neurol. 2022 Jul;21(7):620-631
pubmed: 35526554
Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2022 Jan;212:107069
pubmed: 34844161
Surg Neurol Int. 2021 Aug 24;12:424
pubmed: 34513187
J Neurotrauma. 2019 Feb 15;36(4):517-522
pubmed: 29943683
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 1996;138(2):185-91
pubmed: 8686543
Br J Neurosurg. 2000 Apr;14(2):110-6
pubmed: 10889882
Neurosurg Focus. 2020 Oct;49(4):E21
pubmed: 33002873
J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg. 2022 May;83(3):236-241
pubmed: 34344051
Neurosurg Rev. 2018 Jan;41(1):183-187
pubmed: 28220369
J Neurosurg Sci. 2022 Apr 05;:
pubmed: 35380204
J Neurosurg. 2015 Nov;123(5):1176-83
pubmed: 25955872
World Neurosurg. 2019 Oct;130:e350-e355
pubmed: 31229743
J Neurosurg. 1991 Feb;74(2):212-8
pubmed: 1988590
J Neurotrauma. 2021 Apr 1;38(7):903-910
pubmed: 33107370
BMJ Open. 2021 Dec 3;11(12):e050786
pubmed: 34862284
Neurosurgery. 2006 Mar;58(3 Suppl):S16-24; discussion Si-iv
pubmed: 16710968
J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg. 2017 Nov;78(6):535-540
pubmed: 28249306
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2021 Oct;47(5):1499-1510
pubmed: 32594213
World Neurosurg. 2018 Dec;120:e414-e420
pubmed: 30149158
Br J Neurosurg. 2017 Apr;31(2):244-248
pubmed: 27760467
N Engl J Med. 1981 Jun 18;304(25):1511-8
pubmed: 7231489
J Clin Neurosci. 2019 Sep;67:167-171
pubmed: 31262452
J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg. 2019 Sep;80(5):359-364
pubmed: 31181579
World Neurosurg. 2017 May;101:335-342
pubmed: 28216211
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Nov 01;15(11):
pubmed: 30388747
Injury. 1992;23(8):518-20
pubmed: 1286901
Trials. 2022 Mar 29;23(1):242
pubmed: 35351178
J Neurosurg. 2015 Oct;123(4):1065-9
pubmed: 25909568
Injury. 2012 Nov;43(11):1821-6
pubmed: 22884759
Neurosurg Rev. 2022 Feb;45(1):459-465
pubmed: 33900496