Will Decompressive Craniectomies Lead to Worse Outcomes for TBI Victims?

Decompressive craniectomies are an aggressive surgical strategy increasingly used at trauma centers for victims of diffuse traumatic brain injury. Although surgical methods vary, the decompressive craniectomy involves temporarily removing a portion of the skull to relieve the pressure from the swelling of the injured brain.

As recently reported in the New England Journal of Medicine, results of a randomized trial show that although decompressive craniectomy reduced intracranial pressure and the length of stay in the intensive care unit, it was also associated with a greater risk for unfavorable outcome at 6 months for patients with diffuse traumatic brain injury (TBI) compared with standard care. The standard care involves lowering the patient's body temperature and administering barbiturates.Rates of death didn't differ between groups, but scores on the Extended Glasgow Outcomes Scale were lower in the group undergoing bifrontotemporoparietal craniectomy, and there was a significant increase in risk, more than double, for an unfavorable outcome on that same scale, the researchers report. The unfavorable outcomes included vegetative state and conscious but disabled.

Our findings differ from those of most nonrandomized studies and are contrary to our hypothesis," the researchers, with lead study author D. James Cooper, MD, from the Department of Intensive Care at Alfred Hospital, Monash University, in Melbourne, Australia, acknowledge. " Our unexpected findings underscore the critical importance of performing such trials to test common therapies, particularly in patients with complex critical illnesses."

Experts stress that that the procedure should not be abandoned on the basis of these results. Surgeons must think more carefully about the risks and benefits of the decompressive craniectomy before performing the procedure and must work to further define appropriate clinical settings for this procedure.
 

 

Preventing Second Impact Syndrome in High School Athletes

“Second Impact Syndrome” refers to mild brain injuries suffered repeatedly within a short period (hours, days, or weeks). Although all brain injuries are serious, second impacts can be catastrophic or even fatal. The American Academy of Neurology has developed guidelines  for deciding when it is safe to return to play after a first injury. The Academy recommends that, to reduce the risk of the second impact syndrome, an athlete who suffers a head injury resulting in temporary confusion, amnesia, or other alteration of mental status should not return to play until examined by a health-care provider familiar with these guidelines. Sport oversight committees such as California Interscholastic Federation, have begun to adopt these recommendations.

The guidelines rely in part on self-reporting by student athletes or close observation by coaches and other players. Unfortunately, athletes are often reluctant to admit their injury. To prevent their child athlete from suffering a second impact catastrophe, parents should do the following:

  • Know and recognize the symptoms of a brain injury. As described here.
  • Learn what the coaches know about brain injuries.
  • Find out whether the school has policy for handling brain injuries.
  • Educate your child about the catastrophic risks of a second impact and
  • Emphasize to your child the danger of hiding even the seemingly minor symptoms of brain injury.

Coup Contrecoup Brain Injuries

An impact on one side of the head can cause the pudding-like substance of the brain to hit the inside of the skull and then bounce back and hit the inside of the skull on the opposite side of the head.  When the brain suffers two injuries from one impact, it is called a “coup contrecoup,” or “coup contra coup” injury. Sometimes, the secondary (contrecoup) injury is more damaging than the primary (coup) injury. To complicate things, internal bleeding and swelling from the primary injury can mask the brain damage caused by the secondary injury.  One of my clients went weeks before sophisticated imaging of his brain and neuroevaluations showed that his cognitive problems were almost all due to a “contrecoup injury,” rather than the more obvious “coup” injury.