The Outcome of Surgical Versus Conservative Management in Old Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury

Background and Aim: It is still unclear whether the surgical or conservative approach has the best recovery and the least adverse outcomes after the treatment of patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI), especially the elderly. The use of invasive versus conservative therapies in elderly patients with TBI is controversial, and the current brain surgery procedures for the elderly require further evaluation. Methods and Materials/Patients: In this retrospective cohort study, the medical records of 238 patients with TBI (119 surgical patients and 119 patients treated with conservative methods) over the age of 65 were reviewed. The patients were compared for the degree of recovery indicated by the Glasgow outcome score (GOS) and postoperative complications. Results: No difference was found in the primary Glasgow coma scale (GCS) between surgical and conservative approaches, but after two treatment protocols, the assessment of GCS and GOS showed a significant difference between the two groups; however, after adjusting baseline parameters in a multivariable logistic regression model, the difference between the two groups in CGS and recovery state turned to insignificance. There was no difference between surgical and conservative management in the post-treatment sequels, including contusion, hydrocephalus, myocardial infarction, pulmonary infection, and death. However, the recurrence of hematoma was significantly higher in those who were treated by the conservative method even after multivariate regression modeling. Conclusion: In TBI patients aged over 65 years, surgical management can result in more favorable outcomes compared with the conservative approach