A prospective, randomized, controlled study comparing two surgical procedures of decompressive craniectomy in patients with traumatic brain injury: Dural closure without dural closure

Abstract

Decompressive craniectomy (DC) is used to treat severe traumatic brain injury [TBI]. The present study compared dural open and closed surgical procedures for DC and their relationship with Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and Glasgow Outcome Scale (E) (GOS-E) scores and survival in prospective randomized controlled TBI patients. Patients aged 10–65 (36.97 ± 13.23) with DC were hospitalized in the neurotrauma unit of King George’s Medical University, Lucknow, India. The patients were randomized into test; with dural closure (n = 60) and control without dural closure (OD) (n = 60) groups. After decompressive craniectomy, patients were monitored daily until hospital discharge or death and for three months. GSC/E leakage, infection, and functional status were also assessed. Age (p = 0.795), sex (p = 0.104), mode of injury (p = 0.195), GCS score (p = 0.40, p = 0.469), Rotterdam score (p = 0.731), and preoperative midline shift (MLS) (p = 0.378) did not vary between the OD and CD groups. Neither technique affected the mortality, motor score, or pupil response (p > 0.05). After one and three months, GOS extension was associated with open and closed dural procedures (p = 0.089). Intracranial pressure, brain bulge, GCS score, and MLS were not associated with theoperative method(p > 0.05).The open dural group had a significantly shorter procedure time than the closed dural group (P = 0.026). Both groups showed no significant difference (p > 0.05) between CSF leak and post-traumatic hydrocephalus. Dural opensurgery for a compressed craniectomy is shorter and not associated with significant surgical consequences compared to close dural close surgery.