Craniectomy size and decompression of the temporal base using the altered posterior question-mark incision for decompressive hemicraniectomy
Abstract The altered posterior question-mark incision for decompressive hemicraniectomy (DHC) was proposed to reduce the risk of intraoperative injury of the superficial temporal artery (STA) and demonstrated a reduced rate of wound-healing disorders after cranioplasty. However, decompression size d...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Nature Portfolio
2023-07-01
|
| Series: | Scientific Reports |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-37689-7 |
| _version_ | 1797778918979141632 |
|---|---|
| author | A. Früh A. Zdunczyk S. Wolf R. Mertens P. Spindler D. Wasilewski N. Hecht S. Bayerl J. Onken L. Wessels K. Faust P. Vajkoczy P. Truckenmueller |
| author_facet | A. Früh A. Zdunczyk S. Wolf R. Mertens P. Spindler D. Wasilewski N. Hecht S. Bayerl J. Onken L. Wessels K. Faust P. Vajkoczy P. Truckenmueller |
| author_sort | A. Früh |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract The altered posterior question-mark incision for decompressive hemicraniectomy (DHC) was proposed to reduce the risk of intraoperative injury of the superficial temporal artery (STA) and demonstrated a reduced rate of wound-healing disorders after cranioplasty. However, decompression size during DHC is essential and it remains unclear if the new incision type allows for an equally effective decompression. Therefore, this study evaluated the efficacy of the altered posterior question-mark incision for craniectomy size and decompression of the temporal base and assessed intraoperative complications compared to a modified standard reversed question-mark incision. The authors retrospectively identified 69 patients who underwent DHC from 2019 to 2022. Decompression and preservation of the STA was assessed on postoperative CT scans and CT or MR angiography. Forty-two patients underwent DHC with the standard reversed and 27 patients with the altered posterior question-mark incision. The distance of the margin of the craniectomy to the temporal base was 6.9 mm in the modified standard reversed and 7.2 mm in the altered posterior question-mark group (p = 0.77). There was no difference between the craniectomy sizes of 158.8 mm and 158.2 mm, respectively (p = 0.45), and there was no difference in the rate of accidental opening of the mastoid air cells. In both groups, no transverse/sigmoid sinus was injured. Twenty-four out of 42 patients in the modified standard and 22/27 patients in the altered posterior question-mark group had a postoperative angiography, and the STA was preserved in all cases in both groups. Twelve (29%) and 5 (19%) patients underwent revision due to wound-healing disorders after DHC, respectively (p = 0.34). There was no difference in duration of surgery. Thus, the altered posterior question-mark incision demonstrated technically equivalent and allows for an equally effective craniectomy size and decompression of the temporal base without increasing risks of intraoperative complications. Previously described reduction in wound-healing complications and cranioplasty failures needs to be confirmed in prospective studies to demonstrate the superiority of the altered posterior question-mark incision. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-12T23:23:29Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-a06d95f3bfe64d4195bf7dd77156126d |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2045-2322 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-12T23:23:29Z |
| publishDate | 2023-07-01 |
| publisher | Nature Portfolio |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Scientific Reports |
| spelling | doaj.art-a06d95f3bfe64d4195bf7dd77156126d2023-07-16T11:17:06ZengNature PortfolioScientific Reports2045-23222023-07-011311910.1038/s41598-023-37689-7Craniectomy size and decompression of the temporal base using the altered posterior question-mark incision for decompressive hemicraniectomyA. Früh0A. Zdunczyk1S. Wolf2R. Mertens3P. Spindler4D. Wasilewski5N. Hecht6S. Bayerl7J. Onken8L. Wessels9K. Faust10P. Vajkoczy11P. Truckenmueller12Department of Neurosurgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of HealthDepartment of Neurosurgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of HealthDepartment of Neurosurgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of HealthDepartment of Neurosurgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of HealthDepartment of Neurosurgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of HealthDepartment of Neurosurgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of HealthDepartment of Neurosurgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of HealthDepartment of Neurosurgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of HealthDepartment of Neurosurgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of HealthDepartment of Neurosurgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of HealthDepartment of Neurosurgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of HealthDepartment of Neurosurgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of HealthDepartment of Neurosurgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin, and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of HealthAbstract The altered posterior question-mark incision for decompressive hemicraniectomy (DHC) was proposed to reduce the risk of intraoperative injury of the superficial temporal artery (STA) and demonstrated a reduced rate of wound-healing disorders after cranioplasty. However, decompression size during DHC is essential and it remains unclear if the new incision type allows for an equally effective decompression. Therefore, this study evaluated the efficacy of the altered posterior question-mark incision for craniectomy size and decompression of the temporal base and assessed intraoperative complications compared to a modified standard reversed question-mark incision. The authors retrospectively identified 69 patients who underwent DHC from 2019 to 2022. Decompression and preservation of the STA was assessed on postoperative CT scans and CT or MR angiography. Forty-two patients underwent DHC with the standard reversed and 27 patients with the altered posterior question-mark incision. The distance of the margin of the craniectomy to the temporal base was 6.9 mm in the modified standard reversed and 7.2 mm in the altered posterior question-mark group (p = 0.77). There was no difference between the craniectomy sizes of 158.8 mm and 158.2 mm, respectively (p = 0.45), and there was no difference in the rate of accidental opening of the mastoid air cells. In both groups, no transverse/sigmoid sinus was injured. Twenty-four out of 42 patients in the modified standard and 22/27 patients in the altered posterior question-mark group had a postoperative angiography, and the STA was preserved in all cases in both groups. Twelve (29%) and 5 (19%) patients underwent revision due to wound-healing disorders after DHC, respectively (p = 0.34). There was no difference in duration of surgery. Thus, the altered posterior question-mark incision demonstrated technically equivalent and allows for an equally effective craniectomy size and decompression of the temporal base without increasing risks of intraoperative complications. Previously described reduction in wound-healing complications and cranioplasty failures needs to be confirmed in prospective studies to demonstrate the superiority of the altered posterior question-mark incision.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-37689-7 |
| spellingShingle | A. Früh A. Zdunczyk S. Wolf R. Mertens P. Spindler D. Wasilewski N. Hecht S. Bayerl J. Onken L. Wessels K. Faust P. Vajkoczy P. Truckenmueller Craniectomy size and decompression of the temporal base using the altered posterior question-mark incision for decompressive hemicraniectomy Scientific Reports |
| title | Craniectomy size and decompression of the temporal base using the altered posterior question-mark incision for decompressive hemicraniectomy |
| title_full | Craniectomy size and decompression of the temporal base using the altered posterior question-mark incision for decompressive hemicraniectomy |
| title_fullStr | Craniectomy size and decompression of the temporal base using the altered posterior question-mark incision for decompressive hemicraniectomy |
| title_full_unstemmed | Craniectomy size and decompression of the temporal base using the altered posterior question-mark incision for decompressive hemicraniectomy |
| title_short | Craniectomy size and decompression of the temporal base using the altered posterior question-mark incision for decompressive hemicraniectomy |
| title_sort | craniectomy size and decompression of the temporal base using the altered posterior question mark incision for decompressive hemicraniectomy |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-37689-7 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT afruh craniectomysizeanddecompressionofthetemporalbaseusingthealteredposteriorquestionmarkincisionfordecompressivehemicraniectomy AT azdunczyk craniectomysizeanddecompressionofthetemporalbaseusingthealteredposteriorquestionmarkincisionfordecompressivehemicraniectomy AT swolf craniectomysizeanddecompressionofthetemporalbaseusingthealteredposteriorquestionmarkincisionfordecompressivehemicraniectomy AT rmertens craniectomysizeanddecompressionofthetemporalbaseusingthealteredposteriorquestionmarkincisionfordecompressivehemicraniectomy AT pspindler craniectomysizeanddecompressionofthetemporalbaseusingthealteredposteriorquestionmarkincisionfordecompressivehemicraniectomy AT dwasilewski craniectomysizeanddecompressionofthetemporalbaseusingthealteredposteriorquestionmarkincisionfordecompressivehemicraniectomy AT nhecht craniectomysizeanddecompressionofthetemporalbaseusingthealteredposteriorquestionmarkincisionfordecompressivehemicraniectomy AT sbayerl craniectomysizeanddecompressionofthetemporalbaseusingthealteredposteriorquestionmarkincisionfordecompressivehemicraniectomy AT jonken craniectomysizeanddecompressionofthetemporalbaseusingthealteredposteriorquestionmarkincisionfordecompressivehemicraniectomy AT lwessels craniectomysizeanddecompressionofthetemporalbaseusingthealteredposteriorquestionmarkincisionfordecompressivehemicraniectomy AT kfaust craniectomysizeanddecompressionofthetemporalbaseusingthealteredposteriorquestionmarkincisionfordecompressivehemicraniectomy AT pvajkoczy craniectomysizeanddecompressionofthetemporalbaseusingthealteredposteriorquestionmarkincisionfordecompressivehemicraniectomy AT ptruckenmueller craniectomysizeanddecompressionofthetemporalbaseusingthealteredposteriorquestionmarkincisionfordecompressivehemicraniectomy |