4.7 Article

Early decompressive craniectomy and duraplasty for refractory intracranial hypertension in children: results of a pilot study

期刊

CRITICAL CARE
卷 7, 期 6, 页码 R133-R138

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/cc2361

关键词

craniectomy; intensive care; pediatric; severe head injury

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction Severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) in childhood is associated with a high mortality and morbidity. Decompressive craniectomy has regained therapeutic interest during past years; however, treatment guidelines consider it a last resort treatment strategy for use only after failure of conservative therapy. Patients We report on the clinical course of six children treated with decompressive craniectomy after TBI at a pediatric intensive care unit. The standard protocol of intensive care treatment included continuous intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring, sedation and muscle relaxation, normothermia, mild hyperventilation and catecholamines to maintain an adequate cerebral perfusion pressure. Decompressive craniectomy including dura opening was initiated in cases of a sustained increase in ICP > 20 mmHg for > 30 min despite maximally intensified conservative therapy (optimized sedation and ventilation, barbiturates or mannitol). Results In all cases, the ICP normalized immediately after craniectomy. At discharge, three children were without disability, two children had a mild arm-focused hemiparesis ( one with a verbal impairment), and one child had a spastic hemiparesis and verbal impairment. This spastic hemiparesis improved within 6 months follow-up ( no motor deficit, increased muscle tone), and all others remained unchanged. Conclusion These observational pilot data indicate feasibility and efficacy of decompressive craniectomy in malignant ICP rise secondary to TBI. Further controlled trials are necessary to evaluate the indication and standardization of early decompressive craniectomy as a 'second tier' standard therapy in pediatric severe head injury.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据