Does Drain Position and Duration Influence Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Burr-Hole Evacuation of Chronic Subdural Hematoma? Lessons from a UK Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study.
View / Open Files
Authors
Glancz, Laurence Johann
Poon, Michael Tin Chung
Coulter, Ian Craig
Hutchinson, Peter John
Kolias, Angelos Georgiou
Brennan, Paul Martin
British Neurosurgical Trainee Research Collaborative (BNTRC)
Publication Date
2019-10-01Journal Title
Neurosurgery
ISSN
0148-396X
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Volume
85
Issue
4
Pages
486-493
Language
eng
Type
Article
This Version
VoR
Physical Medium
Print
Metadata
Show full item recordCitation
Glancz, L. J., Poon, M. T. C., Coulter, I. C., Hutchinson, P. J., Kolias, A. G., Brennan, P. M., & British Neurosurgical Trainee Research Collaborative (BNTRC). (2019). Does Drain Position and Duration Influence Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Burr-Hole Evacuation of Chronic Subdural Hematoma? Lessons from a UK Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study.. Neurosurgery, 85 (4), 486-493. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuros/nyy366
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Drain insertion following chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH) evacuation improves patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether this is influenced by variation in drain location, positioning or duration of placement. METHODS: We performed a subgroup analysis of a previously reported multicenter, prospective cohort study of CSDH patients performed between May 2013 and January 2014. Data were analyzed relating drain location (subdural or subgaleal), position (through a frontal or parietal burr hole), and duration of insertion, to outcomes in patients aged >16 yr undergoing burr-hole drainage of primary CSDH. Primary outcomes comprised modified Rankin scale (mRS) at discharge and symptomatic recurrence requiring redrainage within 60 d. RESULTS: A total of 577 patients were analyzed. The recurrence rate of 6.7% (12/160) in the frontal subdural drain group was comparable to 8.8% (30/343) in the parietal subdural drain group. Only 44/577 (7.6%) patients underwent subgaleal drain insertion. Recurrence rates were comparable between subdural (7.7%; 41/533) and subgaleal (9.1%; 4/44) groups (P = .95). We found no significant differences in discharge mRS between these groups. Recurrence rates were comparable between patients with postoperative drainage for 1 or 2 d, 6.4% and 8.4%, respectively (P = .44). There was no significant difference in mRS scores between these 2 groups (P = .56). CONCLUSION: Drain insertion after CSDH drainage is important, but position (subgaleal or subdural) and duration did not appear to influence recurrence rate or clinical outcomes. Similarly, drain location did not influence recurrence rate nor outcomes where both parietal and frontal burr holes were made. Further prospective cohort studies or randomized controlled trials could provide further clarification.
Keywords
Burr-hole craniostomy, Chronic subdural hematoma, Drains, Outcome, Recurrence, Adult, Aged, Drainage, Female, Hematoma, Subdural, Chronic, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Multicenter Studies as Topic, Postoperative Period, Prospective Studies, Recurrence, Treatment Outcome, Trephining, United Kingdom
Sponsorship
European Commission (602150)
Medical Research Council (G0601025)
Medical Research Council (G1002277)
Medical Research Council (G0600986)
Medical Research Council (G9439390)
NETSCC (None)
NETSCC (None)
TCC (None)
Identifiers
External DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/neuros/nyy366
This record's URL: https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/287044
Statistics
Total file downloads (since January 2020). For more information on metrics see the
IRUS guide.
Recommended or similar items
The current recommendation prototype on the Apollo Repository will be turned off on 03 February 2023. Although the pilot has been fruitful for both parties, the service provider IKVA is focusing on horizon scanning products and so the recommender service can no longer be supported. We recognise the importance of recommender services in supporting research discovery and are evaluating offerings from other service providers. If you would like to offer feedback on this decision please contact us on: support@repository.cam.ac.uk