83 research outputs found

    Variation in neurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury : a survey in 68 centers participating in the CENTER-TBI study

    Get PDF
    Correction: Volume: 161 Issue: 3 Pages: 451-455 DOI: 10.1007/s00701-019-03815-6 Accession Number: WOS:000460607500003BackgroundNeurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury (TBI) is challenging, with only low-quality evidence. We aimed to explore differences in neurosurgical strategies for TBI across Europe.MethodsA survey was sent to 68 centers participating in the Collaborative European Neurotrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. The questionnaire contained 21 questions, including the decision when to operate (or not) on traumatic acute subdural hematoma (ASDH) and intracerebral hematoma (ICH), and when to perform a decompressive craniectomy (DC) in raised intracranial pressure (ICP).ResultsThe survey was completed by 68 centers (100%). On average, 10 neurosurgeons work in each trauma center. In all centers, a neurosurgeon was available within 30min. Forty percent of responders reported a thickness or volume threshold for evacuation of an ASDH. Most responders (78%) decide on a primary DC in evacuating an ASDH during the operation, when swelling is present. For ICH, 3% would perform an evacuation directly to prevent secondary deterioration and 66% only in case of clinical deterioration. Most respondents (91%) reported to consider a DC for refractory high ICP. The reported cut-off ICP for DC in refractory high ICP, however, differed: 60% uses 25mmHg, 18% 30mmHg, and 17% 20mmHg. Treatment strategies varied substantially between regions, specifically for the threshold for ASDH surgery and DC for refractory raised ICP. Also within center variation was present: 31% reported variation within the hospital for inserting an ICP monitor and 43% for evacuating mass lesions.ConclusionDespite a homogeneous organization, considerable practice variation exists of neurosurgical strategies for TBI in Europe. These results provide an incentive for comparative effectiveness research to determine elements of effective neurosurgical care.Peer reviewe

    Drafting a Surgical Procedure Using a Computational Anatomy Driven Approach for Precise, Robust, and Safe Vestibular Neuroprosthesis Placement-When One Size Does Not Fit All

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVE: To design and evaluate a new vestibular implant and surgical procedure that should reach correct electrode placement in 95% of patients in silico. DESIGN: Computational anatomy driven implant and surgery design study. SETTING: Tertiary referral center. PARTICIPANTS: The population comprised 81 patients that had undergone a CT scan of the Mastoid region in the Maastricht University Medical Center. The population was subdivided in a vestibular implant eligible group (28) and a control group (53) without known vestibular loss. INTERVENTIONS: Canal lengths and relationships between landmarks were calculated for every patient. The relationships in group-anatomy were used to model a fenestration site on all three semicircular canals. Each patient's simulated individual distance from the fenestration site to the ampulla was calculated and compared with the populations average to determine if placement would be successful. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Lengths of the semicircular canals, distances from fenestration site to ampulla (intralabyrinthine electrode length), and rate of successful electrode placement (robustness). RESULTS: The canal lengths for the lateral, posterior, and superior canal were respectively 12.1 mm ± 1.07, 18.8 mm ± 1.62, and 17.5 mm ± 1.23, the distances from electrode fenestration site to the ampulla were respectively 3.73 mm ± 0.53, 9.02 mm ± 0.90, and 5.31 mm ± 0.73 and electrode insertions were successful for each respective semicircular canal in 92.6%, 66.7%, and 86.4% of insertions in silico. The implant electrode was subsequently revised to include two more electrodes per lead, resulting in a robustness of 100%. CONCLUSIONS: The computational anatomy approach can be used to design and test surgical procedures. With small changes in electrode design, the proposed surgical procedure's target robustness was reached

    Variation in neurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury: a survey in 68 centers participating in the CENTER-TBI study.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Neurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury (TBI) is challenging, with only low-quality evidence. We aimed to explore differences in neurosurgical strategies for TBI across Europe. METHODS: A survey was sent to 68 centers participating in the Collaborative European Neurotrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. The questionnaire contained 21 questions, including the decision when to operate (or not) on traumatic acute subdural hematoma (ASDH) and intracerebral hematoma (ICH), and when to perform a decompressive craniectomy (DC) in raised intracranial pressure (ICP). RESULTS: The survey was completed by 68 centers (100%). On average, 10 neurosurgeons work in each trauma center. In all centers, a neurosurgeon was available within 30 min. Forty percent of responders reported a thickness or volume threshold for evacuation of an ASDH. Most responders (78%) decide on a primary DC in evacuating an ASDH during the operation, when swelling is present. For ICH, 3% would perform an evacuation directly to prevent secondary deterioration and 66% only in case of clinical deterioration. Most respondents (91%) reported to consider a DC for refractory high ICP. The reported cut-off ICP for DC in refractory high ICP, however, differed: 60% uses 25 mmHg, 18% 30 mmHg, and 17% 20 mmHg. Treatment strategies varied substantially between regions, specifically for the threshold for ASDH surgery and DC for refractory raised ICP. Also within center variation was present: 31% reported variation within the hospital for inserting an ICP monitor and 43% for evacuating mass lesions. CONCLUSION: Despite a homogeneous organization, considerable practice variation exists of neurosurgical strategies for TBI in Europe. These results provide an incentive for comparative effectiveness research to determine elements of effective neurosurgical care

    Variation in neurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury: a survey in 68 centers participating in the CENTER-TBI study

    Get PDF
    Source at https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-018-3761-z.Background: Neurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury (TBI) is challenging, with only low-quality evidence. We aimed to explore differences in neurosurgical strategies for TBI across Europe. Methods: A survey was sent to 68 centers participating in the Collaborative European Neurotrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. The questionnaire contained 21 questions, including the decision when to operate (or not) on traumatic acute subdural hematoma (ASDH) and intracerebral hematoma (ICH), and when to perform a decompressive craniectomy (DC) in raised intracranial pressure (ICP). Results: The survey was completed by 68 centers (100%). On average, 10 neurosurgeons work in each trauma center. In all centers, a neurosurgeon was available within 30 min. Forty percent of responders reported a thickness or volume threshold for evacuation of an ASDH. Most responders (78%) decide on a primary DC in evacuating an ASDH during the operation, when swelling is present. For ICH, 3% would perform an evacuation directly to prevent secondary deterioration and 66% only in case of clinical deterioration. Most respondents (91%) reported to consider a DC for refractory high ICP. The reported cut-off ICP for DC in refractory high ICP, however, differed: 60% uses 25 mmHg, 18% 30 mmHg, and 17% 20 mmHg. Treatment strategies varied substantially between regions, specifically for the threshold for ASDH surgery and DC for refractory raised ICP. Also within center variation was present: 31% reported variation within the hospital for inserting an ICP monitor and 43% for evacuating mass lesions. Conclusion: Despite a homogeneous organization, considerable practice variation exists of neurosurgical strategies for TBI in Europe. These results provide an incentive for comparative effectiveness research to determine elements of effective neurosurgical care.</p

    Variation in neurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury: a survey in 68 centers participating in the CENTER-TBI study

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Neurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury (TBI) is challenging, with only low-quality evidence. We aimed to explore differences in neurosurgical strategies for TBI across Europe.METHODS: A survey was sent to 68 centers participating in the Collaborative European Neurotrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. The questionnaire contained 21 questions, including the decision when to operate (or not) on traumatic acute subdural hematoma (ASDH) and intracerebral hematoma (ICH), and when to perform a decompressive craniectomy (DC) in raised intracranial pressure (ICP).RESULTS: The survey was completed by 68 centers (100%). On average, 10 neurosurgeons work in each trauma center. In all centers, a neurosurgeon was available within 30 min. Forty percent of responders reported a thickness or volume threshold for evacuation of an ASDH. Most responders (78%) decide on a primary DC in evacuating an ASDH during the operation, when swelling is present. For ICH, 3% would perform an evacuation directly to prevent secondary deterioration and 66% only in case of clinical deterioration. Most respondents (91%) reported to consider a DC for refractory high ICP. The reported cut-off ICP for DC in refractory high ICP, however, differed: 60% uses 25 mmHg, 18% 30 mmHg, and 17% 20 mmHg. Treatment strategies varied substantially between regions, specifically for the threshold for ASDH surgery and DC for refractory raised ICP. Also within center variation was present: 31% reported variation within the hospital for inserting an ICP monitor and 43% for evacuating mass lesions.CONCLUSION: Despite a homogeneous organization, considerable practice variation exists of neurosurgical strategies for TBI in Europe. These results provide an incentive for comparative effectiveness research to determine elements of effective neurosurgical care.</p

    Aortic valve calcification volumes and chronic brain infarctions in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation

    Get PDF
    Chronic silent brain infarctions, detected as new white matter hyperintensities on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), are associated with long-term cognitive deterioration. This is the first study to investigate to which extent the calcification volume of the native aortic valve (AV) measured with cardiac computed tomography angiography (CTA) predicts the increase in chronic white matter hyperintensity volume after TAVI. A total of 36 patients (79 ± 5 years, median EuroSCORE II 1.9%, Q1–Q3 1.5–3.4%) with severe AV stenosis underwent fluid attenuation inversion recovery (FLAIR) MRI < 24 h prior to TAVI and at 3 months follow-up for assessment of cerebral white matter hyperintensity volume (mL). Calcification volumes (mm3) of the AV, aortic arch, landing zone and left ventricle were measured on the CTA pre-TAVI. The largest calcification volumes were found in the AV (median 692 mm3) and aortic arch (median 633 mm3), with a large variation between patients (Q1–Q3 482–1297 mm3 and 213–1727 mm3, respectively). The white matter hyperintensity volume increased in 72% of the patients. In these patients the median volume increase was of 1.1 mL (Q1–Q3 0.3–4.6 mL), corresponding with a 27% increase from baseline (Q1–Q3 7–104%). The calcification volume in the AV predicted the increase of white matter hyperintensity volume (Δ%), with a 35% increase of white matter hyperintensity volume, per 100 mm3 of AV calcification volume (SE 8.5, p < 0.001). The calcification volumes in the aortic arch, landing zone and left ventricle were not associated with the increase in white matter hyperintensity volume. In 72% of the patients new chronic white matter hyperintensities developed 3 months after TAVI, with a median increase of 27%. A higher calcification volume in the AV was associated with a larger increase in the white matter hyperintensity volume. These findings show the potential for automated AV calcium screening as an imaging biomarker to predict chronic silent brain infarctions

    Predictors of Access to Rehabilitation in the Year Following Traumatic Brain Injury : A European Prospective and Multicenter Study

    Get PDF
    Background Although rehabilitation is beneficial for individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI), a significant proportion of them do not receive adequate rehabilitation after acute care. Objective Therefore, the goal of this prospective and multicenter study was to investigate predictors of access to rehabilitation in the year following injury in patients with TBI. Methods Data from a large European study (CENTER-TBI), including TBIs of all severities between December 2014 and December 2017 were used (N = 4498 patients). Participants were dichotomized into those who had and those who did not have access to rehabilitation in the year following TBI. Potential predictors included sociodemographic factors, psychoactive substance use, preinjury medical history, injury-related factors, and factors related to medical care, complications, and discharge. Results In the year following traumatic injury, 31.4% of patients received rehabilitation services. Access to rehabilitation was positively and significantly predicted by female sex (odds ratio [OR] = 1.50), increased number of years of education completed (OR = 1.05), living in Northern (OR = 1.62; reference: Western Europe) or Southern Europe (OR = 1.74), lower prehospital Glasgow Coma Scale score (OR = 1.03), higher Injury Severity Score (OR = 1.01), intracranial (OR = 1.33) and extracranial (OR = 1.99) surgery, and extracranial complication (OR = 1.75). On contrast, significant negative predictors were lack of preinjury employment (OR = 0.80), living in Central and Eastern Europe (OR = 0.42), and admission to hospital ward (OR = 0.47; reference: admission to intensive care unit) or direct discharge from emergency room (OR = 0.24). Conclusions Based on these findings, there is an urgent need to implement national and international guidelines and strategies for access to rehabilitation after TBI.Peer reviewe

    How do 66 European institutional review boards approve one protocol for an international prospective observational study on traumatic brain injury? Experiences from the CENTER-TBI study

    Get PDF
    Background The European Union (EU) aims to optimize patient protection and efficiency of health-care research by harmonizing procedures across Member States. Nonetheless, further improvements are required to increase multicenter research efficiency. We investigated IRB procedures in a large prospective European multicenter study on traumatic brain injury (TBI), aiming to inform and stimulate initiatives to improve efficiency. Methods We reviewed relevant documents regarding IRB submission and IRB approval from European neurotrauma centers participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI). Documents included detailed information on IRB procedures and the duration from IRB submission until approval(s). They were translated and analyzed to determine the level of harmonization of IRB procedures within Europe. Results From 18 countries, 66 centers provided the requested documents. The primary IRB review was conducted centrally (N = 11, 61%) or locally (N = 7, 39%) and primary IRB approval was obtained after one (N = 8, 44%), two (N = 6, 33%) or three (N = 4, 23%) review rounds with a median duration of respectively 50 and 98 days until primary IRB approval. Additional IRB approval was required in 55% of countries and could increase duration to 535 days. Total duration from submission until required IRB approval was obtained was 114 days (IQR 75-224) and appeared to be shorter after submission to local IRBs compared to central IRBs (50 vs. 138 days, p = 0.0074). Conclusion We found variation in IRB procedures between and within European countries. There were differences in submission and approval requirements, number of review rounds and total duration. Research collaborations could benefit from the implementation of more uniform legislation and regulation while acknowledging local cultural habits and moral values between countries.Peer reviewe

    Brain death and postmortem organ donation: Report of a questionnaire from the CENTER-TBI study

    Get PDF
    Background: We aimed to investigate the extent of the agreement on practices around brain death and postmortem organ donation. Methods: Investigators from 67 Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study centers completed several questionnaires (response rate: 99%). Results: Regarding practices around brain death, we found agreement on the clinical evaluation (prerequisites and neurological assessment) for brain death determination (BDD) in 100% of the centers. However, ancillary tests were required for BDD in 64% of the centers. BDD for nondonor patients was deemed mandatory in 18% of the centers before withdrawing life-sustaining measures (LSM). Also, practices around postmortem organ donation varied. Organ donation after circulatory arrest was forbidden in 45% of the centers. When withdrawal of LSM was contemplated, in 67% of centers the patients with a ventricular drain in situ had this removed, either sometimes or all of the time. Conclusions: This study showed both agreement and some regional differences regarding practices around brain death and postmortem organ donation. We hope our results help quantify and understand potential differences, and provide impetus for current dialogs toward further harmonization of practices around brain death and postmortem organ donation

    Quality indicators for patients with traumatic brain injury in European intensive care units

    Get PDF
    Background: The aim of this study is to validate a previously published consensus-based quality indicator set for the management of patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) at intensive care units (ICUs) in Europe and to study its potential for quality measur
    corecore