4.5 Article

Radiologic Factors Predicting Deterioration of Mental Status in Patients with Acute Traumatic Subdural Hematoma

Journal

WORLD NEUROSURGERY
Volume 111, Issue -, Pages E120-E134

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.12.025

Keywords

Acute traumatic subdural hematoma; Midline shift; Sylvian fissure ratio

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether subdural hematoma (SDH) volume and other radiologic factors predict deterioration of mental status in patients with acute traumatic SDH. METHODS: SDH volumes were measured with a semi-automated tool. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was used to determine optimal cutoff values for mental deterioration, including the variables midline shift, SDH volume, hematoma thickness, and Sylvian fissure ratio. Multivariate logistic regression was used to calculate the odds ratio for mental deterioration based on several predictive factors. RESULTS: We enrolled 103 consecutive patients admitted to our hospital with acute traumatic SDH over an 8-year period. We observed an increase in SDH volume of approximately 7.2 mL as SDH thickness increased by 1 mm. A steeper slope for midline shift was observed in patients with SDH volumes of approximately 75 mL in the younger age group compared with patients in the older age group. When comparing cutoff values used to predict poor mental status at time of admission between the 2 age groups, we observed smaller midline shifts in the older patients. CONCLUSIONS: Among younger patients, an overall tendency for more rapid midline shift progression was observed in patients with relatively low SDH volumes compared with older patients. Older patients seem to tolerate larger hematoma volumes owing to brain atrophy compared with younger patients. When there is a midline shift, older patients seem to be more vulnerable to mental deterioration than younger patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available