Background Limited evidence existed on the comparative effectiveness of decompressive craniectomy (DC) versus craniotomy for evacuation of traumatic acute subdural hematoma (ASDH) until the... Show moreBackground Limited evidence existed on the comparative effectiveness of decompressive craniectomy (DC) versus craniotomy for evacuation of traumatic acute subdural hematoma (ASDH) until the recently published randomised clinical trial RESCUE-ASDH. In this study, that ran concurrently, we aimed to determine current practice patterns and compare outcomes of primary DC versus craniotomy.Methods We conducted an analysis of centre treatment preference within the prospective, multicentre, observational Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (known as CENTER-TBI) and NeuroTraumatology Quality Registry (known as Net-QuRe) studies, which enrolled patients throughout Europe and Israel (2014-2020). We included patients with an ASDH who underwent acute neurosurgical evacuation. Patients with severe pre-existing neurological disorders were excluded. In an instrumental variable analysis, we compared outcomes between centres according to treatment preference, measured by the case-mix adjusted proportion DC per centre. The primary outcome was functional outcome rated by the 6-months Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended, estimated with ordinal regression as a common odds ratio (OR), adjusted for prespecified confounders. Variation in centre preference was quantified with the median odds ratio (MOR). CENTER-TBI is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02210221, and the Resource Identification Portal (Research Resource Identifier SCR_015582).Findings Between December 19, 2014 and December 17, 2017, 4559 patients with traumatic brain injury were enrolled in CENTER-TBI of whom 336 (7%) underwent acute surgery for ASDH evacuation; 91 (27%) underwent DC and 245 (63%) craniotomy. The proportion primary DC within total acute surgery cases ranged from 6 to 67% with an interquartile range (IQR) of 12-26% among 46 centres; the odds of receiving a DC for prognostically similar patients in one centre versus another randomly selected centre were trebled (adjusted median odds ratio 2.7, p < 0.0001). Higher centre preference for DC over craniotomy was not associated with better functional outcome (adjusted common odds ratio (OR) per 14% [IQR increase] more DC in a centre = 0.9 [95% CI 0.7-1.1], n = 200). Primary DC was associated with more follow-on surgeries and complications [secondary cranial surgery 27% vs. 18%; shunts 11 vs. 5%]; and similar odds of in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR per 14% IQR more primary DC 1.3 [95% CI (1.0-3.4), n = 200]).Interpretation We found substantial practice variation in the employment of DC over craniotomy for ASDH. This variation in treatment strategy did not result in different functional outcome. These findings suggest that primary DC should be restricted to salvageable patients in whom immediate replacement of the bone flap is not possible due to intraoperative brain swelling. Show less
A traumatic acute subdural hematoma, a bleeding between the skull and the brain after a traumatic injury, is associated with high mortality and long-term neurocognitive morbidity. One of the age... Show moreA traumatic acute subdural hematoma, a bleeding between the skull and the brain after a traumatic injury, is associated with high mortality and long-term neurocognitive morbidity. One of the age-old cornerstones of treatment is immediate neurosurgical management, with either acute hematoma evacuation or initial conservative treatment with potential delayed surgery. In patients with rapid neurological deterioration because of a large acute subdural hematoma, the indication is clear; without acute surgery, high intracranial pressure will persist and the patient will die. In most cases however, the benefit of acute surgery is less clear, and patients may, at least initially, be managed conservatively. This strategy requires balancing potential complications of surgery against the risk of irreversible neurological deterioration with initial conservative treatment.Neurosurgeon Thomas van Essen first shows that appropriate evidence of acute surgery versus conservative treatment for acute subdural hematoma is lacking, although among comatose patients, acute surgery has a clear benefit. Subsequently, he demonstrates that among neurosurgeons treatment preferences strongly and consistently differ, resulting in large practice variations. Using these treatment preferences, he then shows that patients treated in centers that prefer acute surgery (over conservative treatment) have equal outcomes to patients treated in centers that prefer conservative treatment. Additionally, with regard to surgical technique, primary decompressive craniectomy - leaving the bone flap out after evacuation of the acute subdural hematoma - might not lead to better outcomes as compared to craniotomy – replacing the bone flap directly. The thesis has practical implications for clinical practice: When the neurosurgeon has no clear preference for acute surgery or conservative treatment, treat patients with a traumatic acute subdural hematoma conservatively. And, primary decompressive craniectomy in traumatic acute subdural hematoma should be restricted to patients in whom replacement of the bone flap is not possible due to severe brain swelling. Show less
Background: Traumatic acute subdural haematoma is a debilitating condition. Laterality intuitively influences management and outcome. However, in contrast to stroke, this research area is rarely... Show moreBackground: Traumatic acute subdural haematoma is a debilitating condition. Laterality intuitively influences management and outcome. However, in contrast to stroke, this research area is rarely studied. The aim is to investigate whether the hemisphere location of the ASDH influences patient outcome. Methods: For this multicentre observational retrospective cohort study, patients were considered eligible when they were treated by a neurosurgeon for traumatic brain injury between 2008 and 2012, were > 16 years of age, had sustained brain injury with direct presentation to the emergency room and showed a hyperdense, crescent shaped lesion on the computed tomography scan. Patients were followed for a duration of 3-9 months post-trauma for functional outcome and 2-6 years for health-related quality of life. Main outcomes and measures included mortality, Glasgow Outcome Scale and the Quality of Life after Brain Injury score. The hypothesis was formulated after data collection. Results: Of the 187 patients included, 90 had a left-sided ASDH and 97 had a right-sided haematoma. Both groups were comparable at baseline and with respect to the executed treatment. Furthermore, both groups showed no significant difference in mortality and Glasgow Outcome Scale score. Health-related quality of life, assessed 59 months (IQR 43-66) post-injury, was higher for patients with a right-sided haematoma (Quality of Life after Brain Injury score: 80 vs 61, P = 0.07). Conclusions: This study suggests patients with a right-sided acute subdural haematoma have a better long-term health-related quality of life compared to patients with a left-sided acute subdural haematoma. Show less
Background: The rapidly increasing number of elderly (>= 65 years old) with TBI is accompanied by substantial medical and economic consequences. An ASDH is the most common injury in elderly with... Show moreBackground: The rapidly increasing number of elderly (>= 65 years old) with TBI is accompanied by substantial medical and economic consequences. An ASDH is the most common injury in elderly with TBI and the surgical versus conservative treatment of this patient group remains an important clinical dilemma. Current BTF guidelines are not based on high-quality evidence and compliance is low, allowing for large international treatment variation. The RESET-ASDH trial is an international multicenter RCT on the (cost-)effectiveness of early neurosurgical hematoma evacuation versus initial conservative treatment in elderly with a t-ASDHMethods: In total, 300 patients will be recruited from 17 Belgian and Dutch trauma centers. Patients >= 65 years with at first presentation a GCS >= 9 and a t-ASDH > 10 mm or a t-ASDH < 10 mm and a midline shift > 5 mm, or a GCS < 9 with a traumatic ASDH < 10 mm and a midline shift < 5 mm without extracranial explanation for the comatose state, for whom clinical equipoise exists will be randomized to early surgical hematoma evacuation or initial conservative management with the possibility of delayed secondary surgery. When possible, patients or their legal representatives will be asked for consent before inclusion. When obtaining patient or proxy consent is impossible within the therapeutic time window, patients are enrolled using the deferred consent procedure. Medical-ethical approval was obtained in the Netherlands and Belgium. The choice of neurosurgical techniques will be left to the discretion of the neurosurgeon. Patients will be analyzed according to an intention-to-treat design. The primary endpoint will be functional outcome on the GOS-E after 1 year. Patient recruitment starts in 2022 with the exact timing depending on the current COVID-19 crisis and is expected to end in 2024.Discussion: The study results will be implemented after publication and presented on international conferences. Depending on the trial results, the current Brain Trauma Foundation guidelines will either be substantiated by high-quality evidence or will have to be altered. Show less
