|
|
|
| Analysis of the Characteristics and Influencing Factors of Subdural Effusion Complications after Neurosurgical Treatment of Severe Craniocerebral Injury |
| TANG Ailin, LIU Jia, ZHANG Zhi, et al |
| Western Theater General Hospital, Sichuan Chengdu 610000, China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Objective: To explore the characteristics and risk factors of complications of subdural effusion after neurosurgical treatment of severe craniocerebral injury. Methods: One hundred and thirty-two patients with severe cranial brain injury (sTBI) treated at our hospital from January 2020 to January 2022, all of whom underwent surgery, were selected to analyse the differences in clinical data, serum matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9) and matrix metalloproteinase-2 (MMP-2) between patients who developed and did not develop subdural effusions after surgery. Results: Subdural effusion occurred in 41 cases after surgery, with an incidence of 31.06%. The distribution of subdural effusion was mainly frontal and temporal. The proportions of patients with postoperative subdural effusion aged ≥60 years, with ventricular haemorrhage, cortical incision, midline shift distance >5 cm and bone flap edge distance >2 cm from midline were 65.85%, 51.22%, 51.22%, 68.29% and 41.46% respectively, which were higher than those without subdural effusion (P<0.05). Serum MMP-9 and MMP-2 were (110.20 ± 23.32) ng/ml and (63.30 ± 8.87) ng/ml, respectively, higher in patients who developed subdural effusion after surgery than in patients who did not develop subdural effusion (P<0.05). logistic regression analysis showed that cortical incision, midline shift distance and bone flap edge distance from the midline were The results of the logistic regression analysis showed that cortical incision, midline shift distance and distance of the bone flap edge from the midline were factors influencing the occurrence of subdural effusion in patients (P<0.05). Conclusion: The incidence of subdural effusion after debridement decompression in patients with sTBI remains high, and its occurrence is influenced by the distance of midline displacement, cortical dissection, and distance of the bone flap from the midline, and should be taken into account clinically.
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1] 顾永,任艳明,杨朝华,等.去骨瓣减压术在重型颅脑损伤中的应用进展[J].西部医学,2022,34(6):932-937.
[2] 王陆.腰大池持续引流术联合骨瓣减压控制术对重型颅脑损伤患者并发症和预后的影响[J].世界复合医学,2019,5(1):99-101.
[3] 江基尧.颅脑创伤临床救治指南[M].上海:第二军医大学出版社,2015.4.
[4] 光俊荣.标准外伤大骨瓣开颅术治疗重型颅脑损伤的临床效果探究[J].中国社区医师,2021,37(9):25-26.
[5] 梁焕习.重型颅脑损伤应用双侧去骨瓣治疗的研究进展[J].山西卫生健康职业学院学报,2021,31(1):88-89+135.
[6] Honeybul S,Ho KM.Decompressive craniectomy for severe traumatic brain injury:the relationship between surgical complications and the prediction of an unfavourable outcome[J].Injury,2014,45(9):1332-1339.
[7] 周辉,唐晓平.重型颅脑损伤去骨瓣减压术后继发硬膜下积液的相关危险因素分析[J].现代医学与健康研究电子杂志,2022,6(12):111-114.
[8] 杨昌立,王铁峰,陈茗伟,等.颅脑损伤去骨瓣减压行颅骨修补术后继发硬膜外积液原因及治疗策略[J].海南医学,2021,32(19):2543-2545.
[9] 侯小山,金鹏,魏文峰,等.颅脑外伤去骨瓣减压术后继发硬膜下积液的危险因素分析[J].国际神经病学神经外科学杂志,2017,44(5):468-471.
[10] 曹达彬,吴乔士,柯于勇,等.控制减压技术对重型对冲性颅脑损伤单侧开颅术治疗患者脑氧代谢及脑脊液MMP-3、MMP-9水平的影响[J].吉林医学,2022,43(5):1360-1362.
[11] 钱晓波,季东凯,倪海波.重型颅脑损伤患者血清NSE及CRP检测及其意义[J].系统医学,2022,7(13):19-22.
[12] De Bonis P,Pompucci A,Mangiola A,et al.Post-traumatic hydrocephalus after decompressive craniectomy:an underestimated risk factor[J].Neurotrauma,2010,27(11):1965-1970. |
|
|
|
2023, Vol. 29 
