Under pressure - A historical vignette on surgical timing in traumatic spinal cord injury.

Introduction: It was not even a century ago when a spinal cord injury (SCI) would inevitably result in a fatal outcome, particularly for those with complete SCI. Throughout history, there have been extensive endeavours to change the prospects for SCI patients by performing surgery, even though many believed that there was no way to alter the catastrophic course of SCI. To this day, the debate regarding the efficacy of surgery in improving the neurological outcome for SCI patients persists, along with discussions about the timing of surgical intervention. Research question: How have the historical surgical results shaped our perspective on the surgical treatment of SCI? Material and methods: Narrative literature review. Results: Throughout history there have been multiple surgical attempts to alter the course of SCI, with conflicting results. While studies suggest a potential link between timing of surgery and neurological recovery, the exact impact of immediate surgery on individual cases remains ambiguous. It is becoming more evident that, alongside surgical intervention, factors specific to both the patient and their surgical treatment will significantly influence neurological recovery. Conclusion: Although a growing number of studies indicates a potential correlation of surgical timing and neurological outcome, the precise influence of urgent surgery on an individual basis remains uncertain. It is increasingly apparent that, despite surgery, patient- and treatment-specific factors will also play a role in determining the neurological outcome. Notably, these very factors have influenced the results in previous studies and our views concerning surgical timing.

Is There an Advantage to Minimizing Surgery in Scaphocephaly? A Study on Extended Strip Craniectomy Versus Extensive Cranial Vault Remodeling.

BACKGROUND: Different techniques have been described to correct scaphocephaly. In authors' institution, total cranial vault remodeling (TCVR) was the standard of care. To limit the extent of surgery and the need for transfusion, the technique was minimized to extended strip craniectomy (ESC) without helmet therapy. This retrospective study compares outcome and morbidity between ESC and TCVR. METHODS: Twenty-seven scaphocephalic patients were included. The ESC was performed in 9 patients between 2012 and 2014, and TCVR in 17 patients between 2008 and 2016. Data on blood loss and transfusion rate, duration of surgery, length of hospital stay (LOS), head circumference, and cephalic index (CI) were collected retrospectively. A cosmetic outcome score (COS) was developed to rate esthetic outcome since CI is a limited and crude measurement of cosmetic outcome. RESULTS: The LOS was identical in both groups, but duration of surgery was significantly shorter in ESC (P < 0.0001). Transfusion rate appeared higher in the TCVR group, but differences were not significant (P = 0.11). Cosmetic outcome appeared slightly worse in the ESC group, but results were not significantly different (P = 0.66). There was, however, a significant improvement in postoperative CI in the TCVR group (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The only advantage of ESC was the reduced duration of surgery, but this could not prevent the need for transfusion in this group of patients. The improvement of the CI was significantly less pronounced after ESC, but the COS was not significantly worse in the ESC group. The scar and LOS were similar in both groups. Therefore, our findings indicate that minimizing TCVR to ESC without helmet therapy does not provide significant advantages.