Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The current role of decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury.
Honeybul, S; Ho, K M; Lind, C R P; Gillett, G R.
Affiliation
  • Honeybul S; Department of Neurosurgery, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital and Royal Perth Hospital, Western Australia, Australia. Electronic address: stephen.honeybul@health.wa.gov.au.
  • Ho KM; Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Royal Perth Hospital and School of Population Health, University of Western Australia, Australia.
  • Lind CRP; Department of Neurosurgery, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital and Royal Perth Hospital, Western Australia, Australia; School of Surgery, University of Western Australia, Australia.
  • Gillett GR; Dunedin Hospital and Otago Bioethics Centre, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
J Clin Neurosci ; 43: 11-15, 2017 Sep.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28511969
ABSTRACT
There is little doubt that decompressive craniectomy can reduce mortality however, the results of a recent study has provided more evidence to inform the debate regarding clinical and ethical concerns that it merely converts death into survival with severe disability or in a vegetative state. The recently published RESCUEicp trial compared last-tier secondary decompressive craniectomy with continued medical management for refractory intracranial hypertension after severe traumatic brain injury. Patients were randomly assigned to decompressive craniectomy with medical therapy or to receive continued medical therapy with the option of adding barbiturates. The results of the study support the findings of the stroke studies in that the reduction in mortality was almost directly translatable into survival with either severe disability or in a vegetative state. The question remains as to whether there is a subset of patients who obtain benefit from surgical decompression and it is in this regard that the use of observational cohort studies and sophisticated outcome prediction models may be of use. Comparing the percentage prediction with the observed long outcome provides an objective assessment of the most likely outcome can be obtained for patients thought to require surgical intervention. Whilst there will always be limitations when using this type of data they may help prompt appropriate patient-centred discussions regarding realistic outcome expectations. A broader debate is also needed regarding use of a medical intervention that may leave a person in a condition that they may feel to be unacceptable and also places a considerable burden on society.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Postoperative Complications / Decompressive Craniectomy / Brain Injuries, Traumatic Type of study: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Aspects: Ethics Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: J Clin Neurosci Journal subject: NEUROLOGIA Year: 2017 Document type: Article

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Postoperative Complications / Decompressive Craniectomy / Brain Injuries, Traumatic Type of study: Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Aspects: Ethics Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: J Clin Neurosci Journal subject: NEUROLOGIA Year: 2017 Document type: Article