Surgical Decision Making for the Elderly Patients in Severe Head Injuries

OBJECTIVE: Age is a strong predictor of mortality in traumatic brain injuries. A surgical decision making is difficult especially for the elderly patients with severe head injuries. We studied so-called 'withholding a life-saving surgery' over a two year period at a university hospital. METHODS: We collected data from 227 elderly patients. In 35 patients with Glasgow Coma Score 3-8, 28 patients had lesions that required operation. A life-saving surgery was withheld in 15 patients either by doctors and/or the families (Group A). Surgery was performed in 13 patients (Group B). We retrospectively examined the medical records and radiological findings of these 28 patients. We calculated the predicted probability of 6 month mortality (IPM) and 6 month unfavorable outcome (IPU) to compare the result of decision by the International Mission for Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials in TBI (IMPACT) calculator. RESULTS: Types of the mass lesion did not affect on the surgical decision making. None of the motor score 1 underwent surgery, while all patients with reactive pupils underwent surgery. Causes of injury or episodes of hypoxia/hypotension might have affected on the decision making, however, their role was not distinct. All patients in the group A died. In the group B, the outcome was unfavorable in 11 of 13 patients. Patients with high IPM or IPU were more common in group A than group B. Wrong decisions brought futile cares. CONCLUSION: Ethical training and developing decision-making skills are necessary including shared decision making.

Risk Factors for Enlargement of Spontaneous Putaminal Hemorrhage

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to investigate the risk factors for hematoma enlargement(HE) in the patients with spontaneous putaminal hemorrhage. METHODS: Among the 620 patients with putaminal hemorrhage admitted to our hospital during the period of 1990-2000, sixty patients(9.7%) had HE on the second computed tomographic(CT) scan at the interval of mean 38 hours after attack(range 1.8-168 hours). Clinical features and CT findings of these 60 patients with HE were compared with those of the remaining 560 patients without HE. RESULTS: Multivariate logistic regressional analysis revealed that the independent risk factors for HE were CT finding showing the separation of hematoma(odds ratio[OR] 3.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.7-7.3, p=0.0006) or the hypodensity around or within hematoma(OR 2.5, 95% CI 1.2-5.6, p=0.0194), alcoholism(OR 4.8, 95% CI 2.0-11.7, p=0.0004), hematoma volume of 20-39cc(OR 2.54, 95% CI 1.0-6.3, p=0.0424), Glasgow Coma Scale(GCS) score of 8-11(OR 3.1, 95% CI 1.4-6.9, p=0.0046) and glutamic-pyruvic transaminase>50 IU/L(OR 6.54, 95% CI 2.1-20.5, p= 0.0013). CONCLUSION: Alcoholism and liver dysfunction appear to increase the risk of HE in putaminal hemorrhage. Particularly, careful observation for HE is needed in the patients who are GCS score of 8-11 at the time of admission, who have hematoma volume of 20-39cc and the CT finding showing the separation of hematoma or the hypodensity around or within hematoma.

Methods Measuring the Outcome of Patients with Low Back Pain in the Papers of Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society

OBJECTIVES: Criteria for evaluating the results of treating low back pain vary widely. We examined the methods measuring the outcome in the papers of Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society. METHODS: We selected all published articles describing the methods measuring the outcome of low back pain in the journal. They were classified into 3 periods such as period 1 for volume 1-20, 2 for volume 21-25, and 3 for volume 26-28. RESULTS: There are 25 articles in period 1, 44 in period 2, and 30 in period 3. The outcome was classified into 0 to 5 classes by more than 15 different methods. Although the terms and descriptive criteria differ, 4 classes were the most common classification, being 16 in period 1, 39 in period 2, and 19 in period 3. The outcome was usually measured by authors' own method in period 1. In period 2, criteria by Gill et al was most commonly used along with many different criteria. Criteria by Prolo et al became a common method in period 3. CONCLUSION: Varying methods compromised comparative analyses of outcome. A more simple and universally applicable criteria is necessary to facilitate comparisons among various methods of treatment.