Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Objective: To complete a retrospective comparison of endoscope-assisted burr-hole craniostomy (EBHC) and ordinary burr-hole craniostomy (OBHC) in the treatment of septated chronic subdural hematoma (SCSH).
Methods: A retrospective case note review comparing EBHC and OBHC of SCSH was therefore performed. Data of patients with a SCSH for EBHC or OBHC during the period from January 2011 to December 2016 were retrospectively collected and analysed. Of 73 patients, 42 underwent EBHC and 31 patients were treated by OBHC. The primary outcome measure was recurrence rate and secondary outcome measures were clinical outcome at first postoperative day, discharge and 6 months, the length of hospital stay for neurosurgery, the operative time, and the placement time of drainage tube.
Result: The rate of recurrence was significantly lower in the EBHC (0/42 0%) than in the OBHC (8/31, 25.8%) group (p = .0030). The rate of morbidity was significantly lower in the EBHC (2/42, 4.8%) than in the OBHC (11/31, 35.5%) group (p = .0121). At 30 days, mortality did not differ between groups. Significantly more patients treated with EBHC were alive at 6 months than were those with OBHC. No patient died as a consequence of the operative procedure in the both groups. A discharge GCS of 15 was recorded in more participants with EBHC than in those with OBHC. Gross neurological deficit was significantly less frequent in those with EBHC than in those with OBHC at first postoperative day and discharge, but did not differ at 6 month follow-up. The mean placement time of drainage tube was significantly less in those with EBHC (27.2 h) than in those with OBHC (52.0 h, p = .0055). The mean length of hospital stay for neurosurgery was 4 days in the EBHC group, while it was 5 days in the OBHC group (p = .0015). The mean hematoma reduction rate was significantly higher in those with EBHC than in those with OBHC at first postoperative day (85.3% vs 72.5%, p = .0037) and discharge (90.3% vs 85.1%, p = .0127).
Conclusion: Comparing two minimally invasive procedure protocols for treatment of SCSH, EBHC is a safe and effective surgical technique. It significantly surpasses the results obtained in OBHC in lowering recurrence rate, morbidity rate, placement time of drainage tube, and length of hospital stay for neurosurgery. We recommend EBHC technique to be widely used in the treatment of SCSH, even common chronic subdural hematoma (CSH), subacute and acute subdural hematomas, acute epidural hematomas and empyemas to avoid large craniotomies, particularly in elderly patients, so that patients can receive the best treatment on the basis of minimal trauma.
