Improved outcome of patients with severe thalamic hemorrhage treated with cerebrospinal fluid drainage and neurocritical care during 1990-1994 and 2005-2009

Differences in neurosurgical treatment of intracerebral haemorrhage: a nation-wide observational study of 578 consecutive patients

BACKGROUND

Supratentorial intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) carries an excessive mortality and morbidity. Although surgical ICH treatment can be life-saving, the indications for surgery in larger cohorts of ICH patients are controversial and not well defined. We hypothesised that surgical indications vary substantially among neurosurgical centres in Sweden.

OBJECTIVE

In this nation-wide retrospective observational study, differences in treatment strategies among all neurosurgical departments in Sweden were evaluated.

METHODS

Patient records, neuroimaging and clinical outcome focused on 30-day mortality were collected on each operated ICH patient treated at any of the six neurosurgical centres in Sweden from 1 January 2011 to 31 December 2015.

RESULTS

In total, 578 consecutive surgically treated ICH patients were evaluated. There was a similar incidence of surgical treatment among different neurosurgical catchment areas. Patient selection for surgery was similar among the centres in terms of patient age, pre-operative level of consciousness and co-morbidities, but differed in ICH volume, proportion of deep-seated vs. lobar ICH and pre-operative signs of herniation (p < .05). Post-operative patient management strategies, including the use of ICP-monitoring, CSF-drainage and mechanical ventilation, varied among centres (p < .05). The 30-day mortality ranged between 10 and 28%.

CONCLUSIONS

Although indications for surgical treatment of ICH in the six Swedish neurosurgical centres were homogenous with regard to age and pre-operative level of consciousness, important differences in ICH volume, proportion of deep-seated haemorrhages and pre-operative signs of herniation were observed, and there was a substantial variability in post-operative management. The present results reflect the need for refined evidence-based guidelines for surgical management of ICH.

Favorable clinical outcome following surgical evacuation of deep-seated and lobar supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhage: a retrospective single-center analysis of 123 cases

Background

In spontaneous supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), the role of surgical treatment remains controversial, particularly in deep-seated ICHs. We hypothesized that early mortality and long-term functional outcome differ between patients with surgically treated lobar and deep-seated ICH.

Method

Patients who underwent craniotomy for ICH evacuation from 2009 to 2015 were retrospectively evaluated and categorized into two subgroups: lobar and deep-seated ICH. The modified Rankin Scale (mRS) was used to evaluate long-term functional outcome.

Result

Of the 123 patients operated for ICH, 49.6% (n = 61) had lobar and 50.4% (n = 62) deep-seated ICH. At long-term follow-up (mean 4.2 years), 25 patients (20.3%) were dead, while 51.0% of survivors had a favorable outcome (mRS score ≤ 3). Overall mortality was 13.0% at 30 days and 17.9% at 6 months post-ictus, not influenced by ICH location. Mortality was higher in patients ≥ 65 years old (p = 0.020). The deep-seated group had higher incidence and extent of intraventricular extension, younger age (52.6 ± 9.0 years vs. 58.5 ± 9.8 years; p < 0.05), more frequently pupillary abnormalities, and longer neurocritical care stay (p < 0.05). The proportion of patients with good outcome was 48.0% in deep-seated vs. 54.1% in lobar ICH (p = 0.552). In lobar ICH, independent predictors of long-term outcome were age, hemorrhage volume, preoperative level of consciousness, and pupillary reaction. In deep-seated ICHs, only high age correlated significantly with poor outcome.

Conclusions

At long-term follow-up, most ICH survivors had a favorable clinical outcome. Neither mortality nor long-term functional outcome differed between patients operated for lobar or deep-seated ICH. A combination of surgery and neurocritical care can result in favorable clinical outcome, regardless of ICH location.

Neurocritical care: why does it make a difference?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The care of critically ill brain-injured patients is complex and requires careful balancing of cerebral and systemic treatment priorities. A growing number of studies have reported improved outcomes when patients are admitted to dedicated neurocritical care units (NCCUs). The reasons for this observation have not been definitively clarified.

RECENT FINDINGS

When recently published articles are combined with older literature, there have been more than 40 000 patients assessed in observational studies that compare neurological and general ICUs. Although results are heterogeneous, admission to NCCUs is associated with lower mortality and a greater chance of favorable recovery. These findings are remarkable considering that there are few interventions in neurocritical care that have been demonstrated to be efficacious in randomized trials. Whether the relationship is causal is still being elucidated but potential explanations include higher patient volume and, in turn, greater clinician experience; more emphasis on and adherence to protocols to avoid secondary brain injury; practice differences related to prognostication and withdrawal of life-sustaining interventions; and differences in the use and interpretation of neuroimaging and neuromonitoring data.

SUMMARY

Neurocritical care is an evolving field that is associated with improvements in outcomes over the past decade. Further research is required to determine how monitoring and treatment protocols can be optimized.