RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: There is limited information available regarding the treatment of huge hypertensive putaminal hemorrhage (HPH). This study aimed to evaluate our experience of 33 patients with huge HPH who were treated by open surgery (decompressive craniectomy and hematoma evacuation) and external cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drainage. METHODS: We reviewed the records of 33 consecutive patients admitted to our hospital with huge HPH (≥ 60 cm(3)). All patients were treated by decompressive craniectomy, hematoma evacuation, and CSF drainage. Data collected included age, gender, blood pressure at admission, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) location, ICH volume, degree of midline shift, presence/absence of basal cistern obliteration at admission and before surgery, and presence/absence of intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH). Outcome was assessed by the Glasgow Outcome Scale score at 30 days after surgery. RESULTS: The median GCS score was 5.0 at admission, and improved to 8.0 at 1 week after surgery. The median ICH volume was 95 cm(3) before surgery and 4 cm(3) after surgery. IVH was observed in 93.9% of patients. The overall survival rate to discharge was 75.6% (25/33), including 15.1% (4/33) with good function, 36.4% (12/33) with disability, and 24.3% (8/33) in a vegetative state. The mortality rate was 24.3% (8/33). Patients with right-sided ICH had better outcomes than those with left-sided ICH. No patients with GCS score ≤ 6 and ICH volume ≥ 90cm(3) at admission achieved good postoperative function. Operative time was significantly shorter with hematoma evacuation via the transcortical approach than via the transsylvian approach (3.41 ± 0.75 h vs. 4.14 ± 0.59 h, P<0.001). There were no significant differences in the rates of mortality or survival with good function between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of huge HPH by decompressive craniectomy, hematoma evacuation, and CSF drainage is life-saving. Patients with GCS score 7-8, ICH volume 60-90 cm(3), and right-sided ICH may achieve good recovery. The transcortical approach appears to be more effective than the transsylvian approach for rapid decompression of the edematous brain.
