Twist-Drill or Burr Hole Craniostomy for Draining Chronic Subdural Hematomas: How to Choose It for Chronic Subdural Hematoma Drainage / 대한신경손상학회지

OBJECTIVE: Although twist-drill craniostomy (TDC) has a number of procedural advantages and an equivalent outcome compared to burr hole craniostomy (BHC) for the treatment of chronic subdural hematomas (CSDHs), the latter technique remains the preferred method. We analyzed symptomatic CSDHs in whom TDC at the pre-coronal suture entry point (PCSEP) was the primary method for hematoma drainage and BHC on the parietal was the secondary option. METHODS: CSDHs in 86 consecutive patients were included. TDC at the PCSEP, which is 1 cm anterior to coronal suture at the level of the superior temporal line, was the primary operational technique when the hematoma thickness was suitable, and BHC was performed via the parietal when TDC was unreasonable or failed. The clinical feasibility and outcomes of these approaches were analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 86 patients, 68 (79.1%) were treated by TDC, and 18 (20.9%) by BHC. All patients showed improvements in their symptoms after hematoma drainage. Neither morbidity nor mortality was associated with either technique, and there were no differences in drainage days between the groups. Ten patients had bilateral hematomas and were treated using TDC. Two patients were not sufficiently treated by TDC and, as a result, BHC was applied. Only six hematomas (7% of 86 hematomas) exhibited insufficient thickness on the computed tomography to perform TDC. CONCLUSION: When the hematoma was thick enough, a majority of the CSDHs were drained using TDC at the PCSEP as the first procedure, which was especially useful for bilateral hematomas and in elderly patients.

Chronic Subdural Hematomas : A Comparative Study of Three Types of Operative Procedures

OBJECTIVE: Several surgical procedures have been reported for the treatment of chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH). We compared the results of treatments for CSDH obtained from one burr-hole craniostomy with closed system drainage with or without irrigation, two burr-hole craniostomy with closed system drainage with irrigation, and small craniotomy with irrigation and closed-system drainage. METHODS: Eighty-seven patients with CSDH underwent surgery at our institution from January 2004 to December 2008. Our patients were classified into three groups according to the operative procedure; group I, one burr-hole craniostomy with closed system drainage with or without irrigation (n = 25), group II, two burr-hole craniostomy with closed system drainage with irrigation (n = 32), and group III, small craniotomy with irrigation and closed-system drainage (n = 30). RESULTS: Age distribution, male and female ratio, Markwalder's grade on admission and at the time of discharge, size of hematoma before and after surgery, duration of operation, Hounsfield unit of hematoma before and after surgery, duration of hospital treatment, complication rate, and revision rate were categories that we compared between groups. Duration of operation and hospitalization were only two categories which were different. But, when comparing burr hole craniostomy group (group I and group II) with small craniotomy group (group III), duration of post-operative hospital treatment, complication and recurrence rate were statistically lower in small craniotomy group, even though operation time was longer. CONCLUSION: Such results indicate that small craniotomy with irrigation and closed-system drainage can be considered as one of the treatment options in patients with CSDH.