Collaborative Initiatives in Neurosurgery Research and Publications Between High-Income and Low/Middle-Income Countries: A Bibliometric Analysis.

Despite the globalization of health information, collaborations between high-income countries (HICs) and low/middle-income countries (LMICs), while present, could still increase. This study builds on previous research highlighting LMIC underrepresentation in neurosurgery literature. We conducted a comprehensive bibliometric analysis using the Scopus database to investigate collaborative neurosurgical research between HIC institutions and those in low-income country (LIC)/LMICs. Articles published between 2018 and 2020 were examined. Articles were categorized into 3 groups: guidelines, conferences, and consensus statements; articles related to training and collaborations; and other articles. We categorized articles and authors by country, role, and specific subtopic. We included 238 reports from 34 neurosurgical journals for analysis. Geographic distribution indicated that India led LIC/LMIC contributions (25.21%). Among HICs, the United States had the highest contribution (47.76%). In collaborative studies, Uganda, Cameroon, Tanzania, Indonesia, and Nigeria made significant contributions. LICs and LMICs accounted for 446 authors, while HICs contributed with 592. India has presented the highest number of authors in significant positions. In HICs, significant positions are recognized in USA articles. When scoring authors' position in collaborative papers, still HICs had a clear prevalence. The highest number of collaborations between HICs and LICs/LMICs has been observed in articles related to training and collaborations. Kenya matched India's contributions in training and collaborations. Global guidelines and consensus papers can enhance patient care, but LMICs' involvement remains limited. Further attention to training and collaboration initiatives is needed. This study emphasizes the importance of promoting collaboration and training between countries with varying resources to advance neurosurgical care globally.

Decompressive craniectomy in trauma: What you need to know.

ABSTRACT: Decompressive craniectomy (DC) is a surgical procedure in which a large section of the skull is removed, and the underlying dura mater is opened widely. After evacuating a traumatic acute subdural hematoma, a primary DC is typically performed if the brain is bulging or if brain swelling is expected over the next several days. However, a recent randomized trial found similar 12-month outcomes when primary DC was compared with craniotomy for acute subdural hematoma. Secondary removal of the bone flap was performed in 9% of the craniotomy group, but more wound complications occurred in the craniectomy group. Two further multicenter trials found that, whereas early neuroprotective bifrontal DC for mild to moderate intracranial hypertension is not superior to medical management, DC as a last-tier therapy for refractory intracranial hypertension leads to reduced mortality. Patients undergoing secondary last-tier DC are more likely to improve over time than those in the standard medical management group. The overall conclusion from the most up-to-date evidence is that secondary DC has a role in the management of intracranial hypertension following traumatic brain injury but is not a panacea. Therefore, the decision to offer this operation should be made on a case-by-case basis. Following DC, cranioplasty is warranted but not always feasible, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Consequently, a decompressive craniotomy, where the bone flap is allowed to "hinge" or "float," is sometimes used. Decompressive craniotomy is also an option in a subgroup of traumatic brain injury patients undergoing primary surgical evacuation when the brain is neither bulging nor relaxed. However, a high-quality randomized controlled trial is needed to delineate the specific indications and the type of decompressive craniotomy in appropriate patients.

Education and Training in Global Neurosurgery: The Quest for Diversity and Equitable Collaborations.

Education and training are essential components of global neurosurgery because they provide a sustainable solution to address the workforce deficits in the neurosurgical burden of disease. Neurosurgery training programs and opportunities exist in most areas of the world, but some countries still lack formal mechanisms to train future generations. In this special article, we review the neurosurgical workforce deficit, characterize factors influencing the absence or inadequacy of neurosurgical training, and identify strategies that could facilitate global efforts in building a stronger workforce. We summarize the key neurosurgical training models worldwide and the factors influencing the standardization of neurosurgical education by region. In addition, we evaluate the "brain drain" issue in the larger context of the healthcare workforce and propose solutions to mitigate this phenomenon in neurosurgical practice. Future generations of neurosurgical trainees depend on our efforts to intensify and expand education and training in this new virtual era. As we look to the future, we must prioritize education to strengthen the future neurosurgeons who will lead and shape the frontiers of our field.

A randomized controlled trial of social media promotion in neurosurgical publishing.

The importance of social media has seen a dramatic increase in recent times, but much about its influence in academia is still unknown. To date, no comparative studies analysing the effect of social media promotion on citation counts have been undertaken in neurosurgical publishing. We randomized 177 articles published in Acta Neurochirurgica from May to September 2020. The 89 articles in the intervention group received a standardized social media promotion through one post on our official Twitter/X account, whereas the 88 articles in the control group did not receive any social media promotion. Citation counts, website visits and PDF downloads were tracked at one and two years post-promotion. We found no significant difference in number of citations at one year post-promotion (Intervention: 1.85 ± 3.94 vs. Control: 2.67 ± 6.65, p = 0.322) or at two years (5.35 ± 7.39 vs. 7.09 ± 12.1, p = 0.249). Similarly, no difference was detected in website visits at one (587.46 ± 568.04 vs. 590.65 ± 636.25, p = 0.972) or two years (865.79 ± 855.80 vs. 896.31 ± 981.97, p = 0.826) and PDF downloads at one (183.40 ± 152.02 vs. 187.78 ± 199.01, p = 0.870) or two years (255.99 ± 218.97 vs. 260.97 ± 258.44, p = 0.890). In a randomized study, a structured promotion of general neurosurgical articles on Twitter/X did not significantly impact citation count, website visits, or PDF downloads compared to no social media promotion. Combined with published evidence to date, the impact of social media on citation counts in academic publishing ultimately remains unclear.

False claims of equivalence in the neurosurgical trauma literature: prevalence and associated factors-a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Research quality within the neurosurgical field remains suboptimal. Therefore, many studies published in the neurosurgical literature lack enough statistical power to establish the presence or absence of clinically important differences between treatment arms. The field of neurotrauma deals with additional challenges, with fewer financial incentives and restricted resources in low-income and middle-income countries with the highest burden of neurotrauma diseases. In this systematic review, we aim to estimate the prevalence of false claims of equivalence in the neurosurgical trauma literature and identify its predictive factors. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses recommendations were followed. Randomised clinical trials that enrolled only traumatic brain injury patients and investigated any type of intervention (surgical or non-surgical) will be eligible for inclusion. The MEDLINE/PubMed database will be searched for articles in English published from January 1960 to July 2020 in 15 top-ranked journals. A false claim of equivalence will be identified by insufficient power to detect a clinically meaningful effect: for categorical outcomes, a difference of at least 25% and 50%, and for continuous outcomes, a Cohen's d of at least 0.5 and 0.8. Using the number of patients in each treatment arm and the minimum effect sizes to be detected, the power of each study will be calculated with the assumption of a two-tailed alpha that equals 0.05. Standardised differences between the groups with and without a false claim of equivalence will be calculated, and the variables with a standardised difference equal or above 0.2 and 0.5 will be considered weakly and strongly associated with false claims of equivalence, respectively. The data analysis will be blinded to the authors and institutions of the studies. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study will not involve primary data collection. Therefore, formal ethical approval will not be required. The final systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at appropriate conferences.

Decompressive craniectomy to cranioplasty: a retrospective observational study using Hospital Episode Statistics in England.

Objectives: To investigate the longitudinal trends of decompressive craniectomy (DC) following traumatic brain injury (TBI) or stroke and explore whether the timing of cranial reconstruction affected revision or removal rates using Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) between 2014 and 2019. Design: Retrospective observational cohort study using HES. The time frame definitions mirror those often used in clinical practice. Setting: HES data from neurosurgical centres in England. Participants: HES data related to decompressive craniectomy procedures and cranioplasty following TBI or stroke between 2014 and 2019. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was the timing and rate of revision/removal compared with cranioplasty within <12 weeks to ≥12 weeks. Results: There were 4627 DC procedures, of which 1847 (40%) were due to head injury, 1116 (24%) were due to stroke, 728 (16%) were due to other cerebrovascular diagnoses, 317 (7%) had mixed diagnosis and 619 (13%) had no pre-specified diagnoses. The number of DC procedures performed per year ranged from 876 in 2014-2015 to 967 in 2018-2019. There were 4466 cranioplasty procedures, with 309 (7%) revisions and/or removals during the first postoperative year. There was a 33% increase in the overall number of cranioplasty procedures performed within 12 weeks, and there were 1823 patients who underwent both craniectomy and cranioplasty during the study period, with 1436 (79%) having a cranioplasty within 1 year. However, relating to the timing of cranial reconstruction, there was no evidence of any difference in the rate of revision or removal surgery in the early timing group (6.5%) compared with standard care (7.9%) (adjusted HR 0.93, 95% CIs 0.61 to 1.43; p=0.75). Conclusions: Overall number of craniectomies and the subsequent requirements for cranioplasty increased steadily during the study period. However, relating to the timing of cranial reconstruction, there was no evidence of an overall difference in the rate of revision or removal surgery in the early timing group.

Extended tests for evaluating post-traumatic brain injury deficits in resource-limited settings: methods and pilot study data.

Introduction: Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is one of the leading causes of all injury-related deaths and disabilities in the world, especially in low to middle-income countries (LMICs) which also suffer from lower levels of funding for all levels of the health care system for patients suffering from TBI. These patients do not generally get comprehensive diagnostic workup, monitoring, or treatment, and return to work too quickly, often with undiagnosed post-traumatic deficits which in turn can lead to subsequent incidents of physical harm. Methods: Here, we share methods and results from our research project to establish innovative, simple, and scientifically based practices that dramatically leverage technology and validated testing strategies to identify post-TBI deficits quickly and accurately, to circumvent economic realities on the ground in LMICs. We utilized paper tests such as the Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA), line-bisection, and Bell's test. Furthermore, we combined modifications of neuroscience computer tasks to aid in assessing peripheral vision, memory, and analytical accuracies. Data from seventy-one subjects (51 patients and 20 controls, 15 females and 56 males) from 4 hospitals in Ethiopia are presented. The traumatic brain injury group consists of 17 mild, 28 moderate, and 8 severe patients (based on the initial Glasgow Comma Score). Controls are age and education-matched subjects (no known history of TBI, brain lesions, or spatial neglect symptoms). Results: We found these neurophysiological methods can: 1) be implemented in LMICs and 2) test impairments caused by TBI, which generally affect brain processing speed, memory, and both executive and cognitive controls. Discussion: The main findings indicate that these examinations can identify several deficits, especially the MoCA test. These tests show great promise to assist in the evaluation of TBI patients and support the establishment of dedicated rehabilitation centers. Our next steps will be expansion of the cohort size and application of the tests to other settings.

Cost-effectiveness of craniotomy versus decompressive craniectomy for UK patients with traumatic acute subdural haematoma.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of craniotomy, compared with decompressive craniectomy (DC) in UK patients undergoing evacuation of acute subdural haematoma (ASDH). DESIGN: Economic evaluation undertaken using health resource use and outcome data from the 12-month multicentre, pragmatic, parallel-group, randomised, Randomised Evaluation of Surgery with Craniectomy for Patients Undergoing Evacuation-ASDH trial. SETTING: UK secondary care. PARTICIPANTS: 248 UK patients undergoing surgery for traumatic ASDH were randomised to craniotomy (N=126) or DC (N=122). INTERVENTIONS: Surgical evacuation via craniotomy (bone flap replaced) or DC (bone flap left out with a view to replace later: cranioplasty surgery). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: In the base-case analysis, costs were estimated from a National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective. Outcomes were assessed via the quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) derived from the EuroQoL 5-Dimension 5-Level questionnaire (cost-utility analysis) and the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE) (cost-effectiveness analysis). Multiple imputation and regression analyses were conducted to estimate the mean incremental cost and effect of craniotomy compared with DC. The most cost-effective option was selected, irrespective of the level of statistical significance as is argued by economists. RESULTS: In the cost-utility analysis, the mean incremental cost of craniotomy compared with DC was estimated to be -£5520 (95% CI -£18 060 to £7020) with a mean QALY gain of 0.093 (95% CI 0.029 to 0.156). In the cost-effectiveness analysis, the mean incremental cost was estimated to be -£4536 (95% CI -£17 374 to £8301) with an OR of 1.682 (95% CI 0.995 to 2.842) for a favourable outcome on the GOSE. CONCLUSIONS: In a UK population with traumatic ASDH, craniotomy was estimated to be cost-effective compared with DC: craniotomy was estimated to have a lower mean cost, higher mean QALY gain and higher probability of a more favourable outcome on the GOSE (though not all estimated differences between the two approaches were statistically significant). ETHICS: Ethical approval for the trial was obtained from the North West-Haydock Research Ethics Committee in the UK on 17 July 2014 (14/NW/1076). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN87370545.

A guide to interpreting systematic reviews and meta-analyses in neurosurgery and surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) are methods of data analysis used to synthesize information presented in multiple publications on the same topic. A thorough understanding of the steps involved in conducting this type of research and approaches to data analysis is critical for appropriate understanding, interpretation, and application of the findings of these reviews. METHODS: We reviewed reference texts in clinical neuroepidemiology, neurostatistics and research methods and other previously related articles on meta-analyses (MAs) in surgery. Based on existing theories and models and our cumulative years of expertise in conducting MAs, we have synthesized and presented a detailed pragmatic approach to interpreting MAs in Neurosurgery. RESULTS: Herein we have briefly defined SRs sand MAs and related terminologies, succinctly outlined the essential steps to conduct and critically appraise SRs and MAs. A practical approach to interpreting MAs for neurosurgeons is described in details. Based on summary outcome measures, we have used hypothetical examples to illustrate the Interpretation of the three commonest types of MAs in neurosurgery: MAs of Binary Outcome Measures (Pairwise MAs), MAs of proportions and MAs of Continuous Variables. Furthermore, we have elucidated on the concepts of heterogeneity, modeling, certainty, and bias essential for the robust and transparent interpretation of MAs. The basics for the Interpretation of Forest plots, the preferred graphical display of data in MAs are summarized. Additionally, a condensation of the assessment of the overall quality of methodology and reporting of MA and the applicability of evidence to patient care is presented. CONCLUSION: There is a paucity of pragmatic guides to appraise MAs for surgeons who are non-statisticians. This article serves as a detailed guide for the interpretation of systematic reviews and meta-analyses with examples of applications for clinical neurosurgeons.

A Comprehensive Perspective on Intracranial Pressure Monitoring and Individualized Management in Neurocritical Care: Results of a Survey with Global Experts.

BACKGROUND: Numerous trials have addressed intracranial pressure (ICP) management in neurocritical care. However, identifying its harmful thresholds and controlling ICP remain challenging in terms of improving outcomes. Evidence suggests that an individualized approach is necessary for establishing tolerance limits for ICP, incorporating factors such as ICP waveform (ICPW) or pulse morphology along with additional data provided by other invasive (e.g., brain oximetry) and noninvasive monitoring (NIM) methods (e.g., transcranial Doppler, optic nerve sheath diameter ultrasound, and pupillometry). This study aims to assess current ICP monitoring practices among experienced clinicians and explore whether guidelines should incorporate ancillary parameters from NIM and ICPW in future updates. METHODS: We conducted a survey among experienced professionals involved in researching and managing patients with severe injury across low-middle-income countries (LMICs) and high-income countries (HICs). We sought their insights on ICP monitoring, particularly focusing on the impact of NIM and ICPW in various clinical scenarios. RESULTS: From October to December 2023, 109 professionals from the Americas and Europe participated in the survey, evenly distributed between LMIC and HIC. When ICP ranged from 22 to 25 mm Hg, 62.3% of respondents were open to considering additional information, such as ICPW and other monitoring techniques, before adjusting therapy intensity levels. Moreover, 77% of respondents were inclined to reassess patients with ICP in the 18-22 mm Hg range, potentially escalating therapy intensity levels with the support of ICPW and NIM. Differences emerged between LMIC and HIC participants, with more LMIC respondents preferring arterial blood pressure transducer leveling at the heart and endorsing the use of NIM techniques and ICPW as ancillary information. CONCLUSIONS: Experienced clinicians tend to personalize ICP management, emphasizing the importance of considering various monitoring techniques. ICPW and noninvasive techniques, particularly in LMIC settings, warrant further exploration and could potentially enhance individualized patient care. The study suggests updating guidelines to include these additional components for a more personalized approach to ICP management.

Reliability of a Smartphone App to Objectively Monitor Performance Outcomes in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Developing new clinical measures for degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is an AO Spine RECODE-DCM Research, an international and multi-stakeholder partnership, priority. Difficulties in detecting DCM and its changes cause diagnostic and treatment delays in clinical settings and heightened costs in clinical trials due to elevated recruitment targets. Digital outcome measures can tackle these challenges due to their ability to measure disease remotely, repeatedly, and more economically. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to assess the reliability of the MoveMed battery of performance outcome measures. METHODS: A prospective observational study in decentralized secondary care was performed in England, United Kingdom. The primary outcome was to determine the test-retest reliability of the MoveMed performance outcomes using the intraclass correlation (ICC) of agreement . The secondary outcome was to determine the measurement error of the MoveMed performance outcomes using both the SE of the mean (SEM) of agreement and the smallest detectable change (SDC) of agreement . Criteria from the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) manual were used to determine adequate reliability (ie, ICC of agreement ≥0.7) and risk of bias. Disease stability was controlled using 2 minimum clinically important difference (MCID) thresholds obtained from the literature on the patient-derived modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (p-mJOA) score, namely, MCID ≤1 point and MCID ≤2 points. RESULTS: In total, 7 adults aged 59.5 (SD 12.4) years who live with DCM and possess an approved smartphone participated in the study. All tests demonstrated moderate to excellent test-retest coefficients and low measurement errors. In the MCID ≤1 group, ICC of agreement values were 0.84-0.94 in the fast tap test, 0.89-0.95 in the hold test, 0.95 in the typing test, and 0.98 in the stand and walk test. SEM of agreement values were ±1 tap, ±1%-3% stability score points, ±0.06 keys per second, and ±10 steps per minute, respectively. SDC of agreement values were ±3 taps, ±4%-7% stability score points, ±0.2 keys per second, and ±27 steps per minute, respectively. In the MCID ≤2 group, ICC of agreement values were 0.61-0.91, 0.75-0.77, 0.98, and 0.62, respectively; SEM of agreement values were ±1 tap, ±2%-4% stability score points, ±0.06 keys per second, and ±10 steps per minute, respectively; and SDC of agreement values were ±3-7 taps, ±7%-10% stability score points, ±0.2 keys per second, and ±27 steps per minute, respectively. Furthermore, the fast tap, hold, and typing tests obtained sufficient ratings (ICC of agreement ≥0.7) in both MCID ≤1 and MCID ≤2 groups. No risk of bias factors from the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: The criteria from COSMIN provide "very good" quality evidence of the reliability of the MoveMed tests in an adult population living with DCM.

Reduced temporal muscle thickness predicts shorter survival in patients undergoing chronic subdural haematoma drainage.

BACKGROUND: Chronic subdural haematoma (CSDH) drainage is a common neurosurgical procedure. CSDHs cause excess mortality, which is exacerbated by frailty. Sarcopenia contributes to frailty - its key component, low muscle mass, can be assessed using cross-sectional imaging. We aimed to examine the prognostic role of temporal muscle thickness (TMT) measured from preoperative computed tomography head scans among patients undergoing surgical CSDH drainage. METHODS: We retrospectively identified all patients who underwent CSDH drainage within 1 year of February 2019. We measured their mean TMT from preoperative computed tomography scans, tested the reliability of these measurements, and evaluated their prognostic value for postoperative survival. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty-eight (122, 65% males) patients (median age 78 years, IQR 70-85 years) were included. Thirty-four (18%) patients died within 2 years, and 51 (27%) died at a median follow-up of 39 months (IQR 34-42 months). Intra- and inter-observer reliability of TMT measurements was good-to-excellent (ICC 0.85-0.97, P < 0.05). TMT decreased with age (Pearson's r = -0.38, P < 0.001). Females had lower TMT than males (P < 0.001). The optimal TMT cut-off values for predicting two-year survival were 4.475 mm for males and 3.125 mm for females. TMT below these cut-offs was associated with shorter survival in both univariate (HR 3.24, 95% CI 1.85-5.67) and multivariate (HR 1.86, 95% CI 1.02-3.36) analyses adjusted for age, ASA grade and bleed size. The effect of TMT on mortality was not mediated by age. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CSDH, TMT measurements from preoperative imaging were reliable and contained prognostic information supplemental to previously known predictors of poor outcomes.

Spin in traumatic brain injury literature: prevalence and associated factors. A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Spin is characterized as a misinterpretation of results that, whether deliberate or unintentional, culminates in misleading conclusions and steers readers toward an excessively optimistic perspective of the data. The primary objective of this systematic review was to estimate the prevalence and nature of spin within the traumatic brain injury (TBI) literature. Additionally, the identification of associated factors is intended to provide guidance for future research practices. METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations were followed. A search of the MEDLINE/PubMed database was conducted to identify English-language articles published between January 1960 and July 2020. Inclusion criteria encompassed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that exclusively enrolled TBI patients, investigating various interventions, whether surgical or nonsurgical, and that were published in high-impact journals. Spin was defined as 1) a focus on statistically significant results not based on the primary outcome; 2) interpreting statistically nonsignificant results for a superiority analysis of the primary outcome; 3) claiming or emphasizing the beneficial effect of the treatment despite statistically nonsignificant results; 4) conclusion focused in the per-protocol or as-treated analysis instead of the intention-to-treat (ITT) results; 5) incorrect statistical analysis; or 6) republication of a significant secondary analysis without proper acknowledgment of the primary outcome analysis result. Primary outcomes were those explicitly reported as such in the published article. Studies without a clear primary outcome were excluded. The study characteristics were described using traditional descriptive statistics and an exploratory inferential analysis was performed to identify those associated with spin. The studies' risk of bias was evaluated by the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. RESULTS: A total of 150 RCTs were included and 22% (n = 33) had spin, most commonly spin types 1 and 3. The overall risk of bias (p < 0.001), a neurosurgery department member as the first author (p = 0.009), absence of a statistician among authors (p = 0.042), and smaller sample sizes (p = 0.033) were associated with spin. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of spin in the TBI literature is high, even at leading medical journals. Studies with higher risks of bias are more frequently associated with spin. Critical interpretation of results and authors' conclusions is advisable regardless of the study design and published journal.

Cervical spine immobilisation following blunt trauma in pre-hospital and emergency care: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether different cervical spine immobilisation strategies (full immobilisation, movement minimisation or no immobilisation), impact neurological and/or other outcomes for patients with suspected cervical spinal injury in the pre-hospital and emergency department setting. DESIGN: Systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and two research registers were searched until September 2023. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All comparative studies (prospective or retrospective) that examined the potential benefits and/or harms of immobilisation practices during pre-hospital and emergency care of patients with a potential cervical spine injury (pre-imaging) following blunt trauma. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two authors independently selected and extracted data. Risk of bias was appraised using the Cochrane ROBINS-I tool for non-randomised studies. Data were synthesised without meta-analysis. RESULTS: Six observational studies met the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality was variable, with most studies having serious or critical risk of bias. The effect of cervical spine immobilisation practices such as full immobilisation or movement minimisation during pre-hospital and emergency care did not show clear evidence of benefit for the prevention of neurological deterioration, spinal injuries and death compared with no immobilisation. However, increased pain, discomfort and anatomical complications were associated with collar application during immobilisation. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the limited evidence, weak designs and limited generalisability, the available data suggest that pre-hospital cervical spine immobilisation (full immobilisation or movement minimisation) was of uncertain value due to the lack of demonstrable benefit and may lead to potential complications and adverse outcomes. High-quality randomised comparative studies are required to address this important question. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO REGISTRATION Fiona Lecky, Abdullah Pandor, Munira Essat, Anthea Sutton, Carl Marincowitz, Gordon Fuller, Stuart Reid, Jason Smith. A systematic review of cervical spine immobilisation following blunt trauma in pre-hospital and emergency care. PROSPERO 2022 CRD42022349600 Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42022349600.

Early versus delayed cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy in traumatic brain injury: a multicenter observational study within CENTER-TBI and Net-QuRe.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of early (≤ 90 days) and delayed (> 90 days) cranioplasty following decompressive craniectomy (DC) in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI). METHODS: The authors analyzed participants enrolled in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) and the Neurotraumatology Quality Registry (Net-QuRe) studies who were diagnosed with TBI and underwent DC and subsequent cranioplasty. These prospective, multicenter, observational cohort studies included 5091 patients enrolled from 2014 to 2020. The effect of cranioplasty timing on functional outcome was evaluated with multivariable ordinal regression and with propensity score matching (PSM) in a sensitivity analysis of functional outcome (Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended [GOSE] score) and quality of life (Quality of Life After Brain Injury [QOLIBRI] instrument) at 12 months following DC. RESULTS: Among 173 eligible patients, 73 (42%) underwent early cranioplasty and 100 (58%) underwent delayed cranioplasty. In the ordinal logistic regression and PSM, similar 12-month GOSE scores were found between the two groups (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.87, 95% CI 0.61-1.21 and 0.88, 95% CI 0.48-1.65, respectively). In the ordinal logistic regression, early cranioplasty was associated with a higher risk for hydrocephalus than that with delayed cranioplasty (aOR 4.0, 95% CI 1.2-16). Postdischarge seizure rates (early cranioplasty: aOR 1.73, 95% CI 0.7-4.7) and QOLIBRI scores (ß -1.9, 95% CI -9.1 to 9.6) were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Functional outcome and quality of life were similar between early and delayed cranioplasty in patients who had undergone DC for TBI. Neurosurgeons may consider performing cranioplasty during the index admission (early) to simplify the patient's chain of care and prevent readmission for cranioplasty but should be vigilant for an increased possibility of hydrocephalus. Clinical trial registration nos.: CENTER-TBI, NCT02210221 (clinicaltrials.gov); Net-QuRe, NTR6003 (trialsearch.who.int) and NL5761 (onderzoekmetmensen.nl).

A randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled trial of a two-week course of dexamethasone for adult patients with a symptomatic Chronic Subdural Haematoma (Dex-CSDH trial).

Background: Chronic subdural haematoma is a collection of 'old blood' and its breakdown products in the subdural space and predominantly affects older people. Surgical evacuation remains the mainstay in the management of symptomatic cases. Objective: The Dex-CSDH (DEXamethasone in Chronic SubDural Haematoma) randomised trial investigated the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of dexamethasone in patients with a symptomatic chronic subdural haematoma. Design: This was a parallel, superiority, multicentre, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial. Assigned treatment was administered in a double-blind fashion. Outcome assessors were also blinded to treatment allocation. Setting: Neurosurgical units in the UK. Participants: Eligible participants included adults (aged ≥ 18 years) admitted to a neurosurgical unit with a symptomatic chronic subdural haematoma confirmed on cranial imaging. Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned in a 1 : 1 allocation to a 2-week tapering course of dexamethasone or placebo alongside standard care. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was the Modified Rankin Scale score at 6 months dichotomised to a favourable (score of 0-3) or an unfavourable (score of 4-6) outcome. Secondary outcomes included the Modified Rankin Scale score at discharge and 3 months; number of chronic subdural haematoma-related surgical interventions undertaken during the index and subsequent admissions; Barthel Index and EuroQol 5-Dimension 5-Level utility index score reported at discharge, 3 months and 6 months; Glasgow Coma Scale score reported at discharge and 6 months; mortality at 30 days and 6 months; length of stay; discharge destination; and adverse events. An economic evaluation was also undertaken, during which the net monetary benefit was estimated at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Results: A total of 748 patients were included after randomisation: 375 were assigned to dexamethasone and 373 were assigned to placebo. The mean age of the patients was 74 years and 94% underwent evacuation of their chronic subdural haematoma during the trial period. A total of 680 patients (91%) had 6-month primary outcome data available for analysis: 339 in the placebo arm and 341 in the dexamethasone arm. On a modified intention-to-treat analysis of the full study population, there was an absolute reduction in the proportion of favourable outcomes of 6.4% (95% confidence interval 11.4% to 1.4%; p = 0.01) in the dexamethasone arm compared with the control arm at 6 months. At 3 months, the between-group difference was also in favour of placebo (-8.2%, 95% confidence interval -13.3% to -3.1%). Serious adverse events occurred in 60 out of 375 (16.0%) in the dexamethasone arm and 24 out of 373 (6.4%) in the placebo arm. The net monetary benefit of dexamethasone compared with placebo was estimated to be -£97.19. Conclusions: This trial reports a higher rate of unfavourable outcomes at 6 months, and a higher rate of serious adverse events, in the dexamethasone arm than in the placebo arm. Dexamethasone was also not estimated to be cost-effective. Therefore, dexamethasone cannot be recommended for the treatment of chronic subdural haematoma in this population group. Future work and limitations: A total of 94% of individuals underwent surgery, meaning that this trial does not fully define the role of dexamethasone in conservatively managed haematomas, which is a potential area for future study. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN80782810. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 13/15/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 12. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Chronic subdural haematoma is one of the most common conditions managed in adult neurosurgery and mainly affects older people. It is an 'old' collection of blood and blood breakdown products found on the surface of the brain. Surgery to drain the liquid collection is effective, with most patients improving. Given that inflammation is involved in the disease process, a commonly used steroid, dexamethasone, has been used alongside surgery or instead of surgery since the 1970s. However, there is no consensus or high-quality studies confirming the effectiveness of dexamethasone for the treatment of chronic subdural haematoma. This study was designed to determine the effectiveness of adding dexamethasone to the normal treatment for patients with a symptomatic chronic subdural haematoma. The benefit of adding dexamethasone was measured using a disability score called the Modified Rankin Scale, which can be divided into favourable and unfavourable outcomes. This was assessed at 6 months after entry into the study. In total, 748 adults with a symptomatic chronic subdural haematoma treated in neurosurgical units in the UK participated. Each participant had an equal chance of receiving either dexamethasone or a placebo because they were assigned randomly. Neither the patients nor the investigators knew who received dexamethasone and who received placebo. Most patients in both groups had an operation to drain the haematoma and experienced significant functional improvement at 6 months compared with their initial admission to hospital. However, patients who received dexamethasone had a lower chance than patients who received placebo of favourable recovery at 6 months. Specifically, 84% of patients who received dexamethasone had recovered well at 6 months, compared with 90% of patients who received placebo. There were more complications in the group that received dexamethasone. This trial demonstrates that adding dexamethasone to standard treatment reduced the chance of a favourable outcome compared with standard treatment alone. Therefore, this study does not support the use of dexamethasone in treating patients with a symptomatic chronic subdural haematoma.

Consensus-based recommendations for diagnosis and surgical management of cranioplasty and post-traumatic hydrocephalus from a European panel.

Introduction: Planning cranioplasty (CPL) in patients with suspected or proven post-traumatic hydrocephalus (PTH) poses a significant management challenge due to a lack of clear guidance. Research question: This project aims to create a European document to improve adherence and adapt to local protocols based on available resources and national health systems. Methods: After a thorough non-systematic review, a steering committee (SC) formed a European expert panel (EP) for a two-round questionnaire using the Delphi method. The questionnaire employed a 9-point Likert scale to assess the appropriateness of statements inherent to two sections: "Diagnostic criteria for PTH" and "Surgical strategies for PTH and cranial reconstruction." Results: The panel reached a consensus on 29 statements. In the "Diagnostic criteria for PTH" section, five statements were deemed "appropriate" (consensus 74.2-90.3 %), two were labeled "inappropriate," and seven were marked as "uncertain."In the "Surgical strategies for PTH and cranial reconstruction" section, four statements were considered "appropriate" (consensus 74.2-90.4 %), six were "inappropriate," and five were "uncertain." Discussion and conclusion: Planning a cranioplasty alongside hydrocephalus remains a significant challenge in neurosurgery. Our consensus conference suggests that, in patients with cranial decompression and suspected hydrocephalus, the most suitable diagnostic approach involves a combination of evolving clinical conditions and neuroradiological imaging. The recommended management sequence prioritizes cranial reconstruction, with the option of a ventriculoperitoneal shunt when needed, preferably with a programmable valve. We strongly recommend to adopt local protocols based on expert consensus, such as this, to guide patient care.

Artificial intelligence-enabled ophthalmoscopy for papilledema: a systematic review protocol.

Papilledema is a pathology delineated by the swelling of the optic disc secondary to raised intracranial pressure (ICP). Diagnosis by ophthalmoscopy can be useful in the timely stratification of further investigations, such as magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography to rule out pathologies associated with raised ICP. In resource-limited settings, in particular, access to trained specialists or radiological imaging may not always be readily available, and accurate fundoscopy-based identification of papilledema could be a useful tool for triage and escalation to tertiary care centres. Artificial intelligence (AI) has seen a rise in neuro-ophthalmology research in recent years, but there are many barriers to the translation of AI to clinical practice. The objective of this systematic review is to garner and present a comprehensive overview of the existing evidence on the application of AI in ophthalmoscopy for papilledema, and to provide a valuable perspective on this emerging field that sits at the intersection of clinical medicine and computer science, highlighting possible avenues for future research in this domain.

Does the implementation of a trauma system affect injury-related morbidity and economic outcomes? A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Trauma accounts for a huge burden of disease worldwide. Trauma systems have been implemented in multiple countries across the globe, aiming to link and optimise multiple aspects of the trauma care pathway, and while they have been shown to reduce overall mortality, much less is known about their cost-effectiveness and impact on morbidity. METHODS: We performed a systematic review to explore the impact the implementation of a trauma system has on morbidity, quality of life and economic outcomes, in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. All comparator study types published since 2000 were included, both retrospective and prospective in nature, and no limits were placed on language. Data were reported as a narrative review. RESULTS: Seven articles were identified that met the inclusion criteria, all of which reported a pre-trauma and post-trauma system implementation comparison in high-income settings. The overall study quality was poor, with all studies demonstrating a severe risk of bias. Five studies reported across multiple types of trauma patients, the majority describing a positive impact across a variety of morbidity and health economic outcomes following trauma system implementation. Two studies focused specifically on traumatic brain injury and did not demonstrate any impact on morbidity outcomes. DISCUSSION: There is currently limited and poor quality evidence that assesses the impact that trauma systems have on morbidity, quality of life and economic outcomes. While trauma systems have a fundamental role to play in high-quality trauma care, morbidity and disability data can have large economic and cultural consequences, even if mortality rates have improved. The sociocultural and political context of the surrounding healthcare infrastructure must be better understood before implementing any trauma system, particularly in resource-poor and fragile settings. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022348529 LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.