Removal Notice to 'Neurosurgical Steps and Lessons Learned in Final Separation of Three-Years-Old Craniopagus Twins' [World Neurosurgery (2022) 18924].

This article has been removed: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (https://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy). This article has been removed at the request of the Editor-in-Chief because the authors did not have authorised consent from the legal representatives of the patients to publish the details of their case.

Neurosurgical Steps and Lessons Learned in Final Separation of 3-Year-Old Craniopagus Twins.

The only published paper1 describing the separation of the conjoined twins did not describe the novel steps and techniques of the microsurgery part, which lasted 26 hours. That paper did not include the neurosurgical video, either. The massive intracerebral hemorrhage that occurred on postoperative day 33 was not reported, and its potential causes have not been scrutinized. The strategy of final separation was developed during day-by-day microsurgical practice on cadavers and did lead us to novel surgical solutions as the introduction of the application of hinge and distractors. One of the twins advanced to GOS 5 status during first 5 postoperative months. The other twin slowly advanced to GOS 3 status and remained at that functional level. The latter suffered the massive brain hemorrhage on postoperative day 33, which led to delayed rehabilitation and interfered with a potentially better outcome. The thorough analysis of the potential causative factors revealed the possible pathophysiologic mechanism behind that complication.2 Two major factors have been identified, one of which is the traction-related traumatic brain injury that evolved during supine position. Another probable theory is the lack of sufficient reconstruction of the posterior part of the skull, which caused a recurring tactile microtrauma of the brain due to the supine position. The hemorrhage may have been facilitated by the fact that their coagulation tests were on the lower edge of normal parameters. It was a mistake that this part of the surgery was not performed by the neurosurgeons who designed it and practiced extensively on fresh cadavers using 3-dimensional models. Sufficient cranioplasty was performed 3 months later. It is impossible to say with certainty the cause of the hemorrhage, since there may have been other unknown causes (e.g., blood pressure spike). As a contributing factor, congestion of the veins is also possible.3 We concluded that closer monitoring, a stricter management of the interdisciplinary team work, and realizing the seriousness of the lack of sufficient structural support earlier could have prevented this unfortunate complication. In a similar case we advise future professionals to use a halo ring postoperatively for posterior protection until a sufficient cranioplasty can safely be done.