1.
Prevalence of shunt dependency and clinical outcome in patients with massive intraventricular haemorrhage treated with endoscopic washout and external ventricular drainage
Johnson JR, Idris Z, Abdullah JM, Alias A, Haspani MS
The Malaysian Journal of Medical Sciences : Mjms. 2017;24((1)):40-46.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH) causes blockage of ventricular conduits leading to hydrocephalus, increased intracranial pressure (ICP), and a reduced level of consciousness. The current standard management of IVH is insertion of an external ventricular drainage (EVD) catheter. However, this procedure addresses only the problems of acute hydrocephalus and raised ICP. Endoscopic washout allows for a more complete removal of the intraventricular clot. This study compared these two types of treatment in terms of shunt dependency and relevant clinical outcomes. METHODS Patients who were 10-80 years old and presented with a Graeb score of more than six were randomised into endoscopic washout and EVD treatment groups. A CT brain was repeated on each patient within 24 hours after surgery, and if a patient's Graeb score was still more than six, a repeat endoscopic washout was performed to clear the remaining clots. All patients were monitored for shunt dependency at two weeks and three months, and clinical outcomes were measured at six months after the procedure. RESULTS A total of 39 patients were recruited; 19 patients were randomised into the endoscopic washout group, and 20 were randomised into the EVD group. However, three patients in the endoscopic group refused that treatment and opted for EVD insertion. Patients treated with endoscopic washout had significantly less drainage dependency at two weeks (P < 0.005) and at three months (P < 0.004) as compared to patients in the external ventricular drainage group. The reduction in Graeb scores was also significantly greater in the endoscopic washout group (P < 0.001). However, the functional outcome at six months measured via a modified Rankin scale score was no different in the two groups of patients. The difference in the functional outcome of the patients was mainly dependent on the initial pathology, with those presenting with a thalamic bleed with IVH showing a poor functional outcome. This parameter was also influenced by the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score on admission, with those patients with a score of 12 or less having a poor functional outcome (MRS 5-6) at three and six months after the surgery. CONCLUSIONS The use of neuroendoscopy in patients with a massive IVH significantly reduced drainage dependency. However, it did not alter the final functional outcome.
2.
Cell salvage in emergency trauma surgery
Li J, Sun SL, Tian JH, Yang K, Liu R, Li J
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2015;((1):):CD007379.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Trauma is the leading cause of death in people under the age of 45 years. Over the past 20 years, intraoperative autologous transfusions (obtained by cell salvage, also known as intraoperative blood salvage (IBS)) have been used as an alternative to blood products from other individuals during surgery because of the risk of transfusion-related infections such as hepatitis and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). In this review, we sought to assess the effects and cost of cell salvage in individuals undergoing abdominal or thoracic surgery. OBJECTIVES To compare the effect and cost of cell salvage with those of standard care in individuals undergoing abdominal or thoracic trauma surgery. SEARCH METHODS We ran the search on 25 November 2014. We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily and Ovid OLDMEDLINE, EMBASE Classic + EMBASE (OvidSP), PubMed, and ISI Web of Science (SCI-Expanded & CPSI-SSH). We also screened reference lists and contacted principal investigators. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials comparing cell salvage with no cell salvage (standard care) in individuals undergoing abdominal or thoracic trauma surgery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two authors independently extracted data from the trial reports. We used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. MAIN RESULTS Only one small study (n = 44) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Results suggested that cell salvage did not affect mortality overall (death rates were 67% (14/21 participants) in the cell salvage group and 65% (15/23) in the control group) (odds ratio (OR) 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31 to 3.72). For individuals with abdominal injury, mortality was also similar in both groups (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.10).Less donor blood was needed for transfusion within the first 24 hours postinjury in the cell salvage group compared with the control group (mean difference (MD) -4.70 units, 95% CI -8.09 to -1.31). Adverse events, notably postoperative sepsis, did not differ between groups (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.55). Cost did not notably differ between groups (MD -177.81, 95% CI -452.85 to 97.23, measured in GBP in 2002). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Evidence for the use of cell salvage in individuals undergoing abdominal or thoracic trauma surgery remains equivocal. Large, multicentre, methodologically rigorous trials are needed to assess the relative efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of cell salvage in different surgical procedures in the emergency context.