Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 61123

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2023 | Month : April | Volume : 17 | Issue : 4 | Page : PC14 - PC20 Full Version

Outcomes of Decompressive Craniectomy in Patients with Supratentorial Ischaemic Stroke: A Longitudinal Study


Published: April 1, 2023 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2023/62707.17747
Jitendra Nagar, Yash Madnani, Anand Sharma, Avinash Sharma, Ankit Meena

1. MCH Resident, Department of Neurosurgery, Gajra Raja Medical College, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, India. 2. MCH Resident, Department of Neurosurgery, Gajra Raja Medical College, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, India. 3. Associate Professor, Department of Neurosurgery, Gajra Raja Medical College, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, India. 4. Professor, Department of Neurosurgery, Gajra Raja Medical College, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, India. 5. MCH Resident, Department of Neurosurgery, Gajra Raja Medical College, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Avinash Sharma,
401, NG Grande Building, Alkapuri, Gwalior-474011, Madhya Pradesh, India.
E-mail: richavi.sharma@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Decompressive Craniectomy (DC) is a surgical procedure that entails removing a section of the skull with the aim of preventing neuronal damage and improving the patient’s prognosis. The goal was to determine if DC is associated with reduced risk of death and improved outcomes.

Aim: To study the outcome, morbidity and mortality associated with DC in patients with intracranial ischaemic infarct.

Materials and Methods: A longitudinal single-centre study was carried in the Department of Neurosurgery, GR Medical College and JA Group of Hospitals, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, India, from January 2019 to June 2020. A total of 25 cases were operated and subsequently followed-up. Patients who were admitted with life-threatening supratentorial infarction and deemed eligible for DC based on clinical assessment {National Institute of Health Stroke Scale, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS)} and neuroimaging with computed tomography head or Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) brain were prospectively included in the study. The outcomes of the study were evaluated based on the functional impairment experienced by patients after a stroke. This was assessed using the modified Rankin Scale (mRS), which is a seven-point scale that ranges from 0 (no symptoms) to 6 (death). The assessments were conducted at discharge, three months and six months. Paired t-test was used to analyse the functional outcomes of patients at admission, discharge, 3-month, and 6-month follow-up, using the mRS as the tool of evaluation. The relationship between patient characteristics and neurological outcome was analysed using the Chi-square test.

Results: In the study, 25 patients were analysed, with 76% being males. The right hemisphere was affected in 13 (52%) patients, while 12 (48%) patients had left hemisphere involvement. At admission, 23 (92%) patients had a mRS score of five and only 2 (8%) patients had mRS score of 4. During hospitalisation, 8 (32%) patients died. After discharge, 7 (28%) patients had a mRS score of 4 or less, which increased to 9 (36%) patients at three months follow-up and 12 (48%) patients at six months follow-up.

Conclusion: The present study concluded that decompressive hemicraniectomy improved neurological outcomes of patients with supratentorial ischaemic infarcts, with patient characteristics playing a significant role.

Keywords

Brain infarction, Cranial decompression, Hemicraniectomy, Outcome assessment, Prognosis, Stroke scale

The World Health Organisation (WHO) defined stroke in the 1970s as rapidly developing clinical signs of focal or global disturbance of cerebral function, lasting more than 24 hours or leading to death, with no apparent cause other than of vascular origin (1). A study conducted by the World Stroke Organisation (WSO) found that the incidence of stroke in 2021-2022 was 158 per lakh population, of which 89% belonged to low and middle-income countries. This incidence had increased from 56 per lakh population in 1970-1979 and 117 per lakh population from 2000-2008 (2).

The majority of strokes were caused by cerebral infarction (70-85%) and a smaller percentage by intracerebral and subarachnoid haemorrhage (15-30%) (3). A 20% of strokes occurred in the infratentorial brain (4). The primary vasculature located in the infratentorial region includes the basilar artery and paired vertebral arteries, which supply the inferior thalamus, occipital lobes, midbrain, brainstem and cerebellum. Brainstem haemorrhages had a 65% mortality rate and cerebellar haemorrhages had a 40% mortality rate (5). Uncontrolled hypertension caused prolonged damage to blood vessels leading to fragility and rupture, making supportive care the best treatment for most patients, as surgery was only possible for 25% of hospitalised cerebellar haemorrhage patients and the brainstem was not surgically accessible (6).

Severe morbidity and mortality after stroke are often attributed to large hemispheric infarctions, which are typically caused by insufficient collateral flow resulting from occlusion of the distal Internal Carotid Artery (ICA) or proximal Middle Cerebral Artery (MCA) trunk (7). Malignant cerebral infarction affects approximately 10 to 20 individuals per 100,000 each year, with about 10% of all strokes resulting in neurological deterioration due to oedema (8),(9). Increased brain swelling and raised intracranial pressure can lead to herniation and progressive clinical deterioration in approximately 10-15% of patients with cerebral infarction in the MCA territory (10). Oedema that occurs in cerebral infarction is caused by the dysfunction of the endothelium in the capillaries, leading to the breakdown of the blood-brain barrier. This type of oedema is typically observed between 2-5 days after the onset of the infarction and is linked to a poor outcome (11),(12). Major risk factors identified in India are hypertension (>95 mmHg diastolic), hyperglycaemia, tobacco use (smoking/chewing) and low normal haemoglobin levels (less than 10 gm) (13). Previously described series, done by Rai AT et al., reported a fatality rate of approximately 80%, with most survivors experiencing severe disability, as done by Smith WS et al., in their study (10),(14).

A surgical intervention, Decompressive Craniectomy (DC), was typically necessary due to the limited effectiveness of medical management for malignant infarction. DC involved removal of a portion of the skull to prevent neuronal damage and improve prognosis. The mortality rate for malignant MCA infarction was 80% with conservative treatment (10). But there was insufficient evidence to suggest non surgical therapies beyond specialised care in a stroke unit or intensive care unit could improve outcomes. The mortality rates reported for DC for malignant MCA infarct varied widely, ranging from 5.2 to 50%, in non randomised studies and 22% in a pooled analysis of randomised control trials (15),(16),(17),(18),(19). These variations were due to the timing of DC, sample size, and when the mortality was measured after surgery, as the poststroke mortality rate increased with time. Hence, DC should be considered in patients with malignant MCA infarction as well as large cerebral infarction with clinical deterioration. This study was planned to evaluate the effectiveness of DC in the ischaemic infarct.

Material and Methods

The present longitudinal single-centre study was conducted in the Department of Neurosurgery, GR Medical College and JA Group of Hospitals, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, India, from January 2019 to June 2020. The Institutional Ethics Committee granted approval for the study protocol (D.No.116/IEC/GRMC/2018) and written informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Sample size calculation: The study consisted of 25 patients. Based on the results of DC in patients with supratentorial ischaemic stroke, having an incidence of 1% of fatal space-occupying brain oedema with a supratentorial infarct with a confidence interval of 95% and expected error of 5%, a sample size of 16 patients were required (20),(21). Hence, 25 patients were considered for the present study.

Patients with malignant supratentorial ischaemic infarcts, who were recruited through admission in the Neurosurgery Department. Patients who were admitted with intracranial infarction that was deemed life-threatening and required DC were included in this study. Their eligibility was based on clinical evaluations such as National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (9) and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) (22), as well as neuroimaging using computed tomography head or Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) brain). The enrolment was conducted prospectively.

Inclusion criteria: All admitted patients aged between 26 to 65 years having an ischaemic stroke in anterior circulation with a Computed Tomography (CT) scan showing intracerebral infarct of atleast 50% MCA territory with midline shift >5 mm and/or Diffusion-weighted Image (DWI) volume >145 cc with clinical deterioration were included in the study.

Exclusion criteria: Patients with a GCS score of 3 and/or dilated and fixed pupils at the time of presentation were excluded from the study.

Study Procedure

Patient demographics such as age, sex, medical history, presenting signs and symptoms, risk factors for stroke, blood pressure, and laboratory parameters {Complete Blood Count (CBC), Renal Function Test (RFT), Liver Function Test (LFT), Prothrombin Time-International Normalised Ratio (PT-INR), serum electrolytes, and lipid profile} were documented, as well as imaging findings (type of stroke, arterial territory involved, and midline shift). The GCS, National Institute Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score and mRS were recorded upon admission according to the prescribed proforma.

Glasgow coma scale (22): The GCS is a widely used scoring system with good repeatability. It has three components which are eye response, motor response, and verbal response. Medical professionals can measure three distinct aspects of behaviour, including motor responsiveness, verbal performance, and eye-opening, which can be continuously assessed and documented on a chart. The sensitivity and specificity of the GCS score are 92% and 85%, respectively. As it is a numerical scale, so the changes in the examination may be more easily noticed over time and compared between different examiners. So, the GCS was used in this study for the daily neurological status of the patient.

National Institute Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) (9): It is one of the most common scale used to determine the severity of stroke. The 15NIHSS is a 15-item non linear measure of neurological deficits used to assess symptoms related to acute anterior circulation stroke. The scale includes evaluation of consciousness, motor function, sensory function, coordination, neglect, language, visual fields and extraocular movements. The score ranges from 0 to 42 and higher scores indicate more severe stroke symptoms. This scale was used in this study to determine the severity of stroke.

Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) (23): The mRS is a commonly used tool to measure the degree of disability or dependence after stroke. It has six categories, ranging from 0 to 5, with 0 indicating no symptoms and 5 indicating severe disability. In addition, a score of 6 is often added to indicate death. The mRS is widely used in both clinical trials and routine clinical practice for follow-up assessments after acute stroke.

Patients were enrolled in this study based on MRI DWI that demonstrated an infarct volume of 145 cm3 or more than 145 cm3. A radiologist assisted in measuring the infarct volume (DWI volume) on the DWI scans (b-value 1000 s/mm2) (24). Initially, images showing the infarcted region as a bright signal were chosen. Using a semi-automated thresholding technique, the hyperintense area was delineated on each slice. The threshold was increased until the selected area matched the hyperintense area that would have been contoured manually. If multiple lesions were present, each one was contoured with the same method. The surface area of each lesion was added, and the DWI volume was calculated by multiplying the total surface area by the slice thickness. (Table/Fig 1),(Table/Fig 2)a,(Table/Fig 2)b shows the radiological image of right MCA infarct.

Surgical procedure: The surgical procedure involved creating a reverse question mark-shaped incision, starting 2-3 cm lateral to midline behind the hairline and extending atleast 12-15 cm posteriorly, curving around and down to the posterior root of the zygoma. A myocutaneous flap was formed by reflecting the skin and temporalis muscle anteriorly. The bone removal was limited to 2-3 cm from the midline, avoiding the frontal sinus and superior sagittal sinus, and extending atleast 12 cm anteroposteriorly (Table/Fig 3). A large bone flap, including the frontoparietaltemporal and sometimes occipital bone, was removed, and the dura was opened in a stellate fashion for maximum cerebral decompression. Pericranium was spread over the brain to cover the bulging brain, instead of performing a watertight duraplasty (Table/Fig 3). The bone flap was placed in a subcutaneous pocket overlying the abdomen until subsequent cranioplasty.

Outcome measure:

1) The primary outcome measure was the functional outcome, which was determined by a mRS score.
2) Secondary outcome measures were mortality and median time of survival. The follow-up assessment was conducted at the Outpatient Department (OPD) visits at 3, and 6 months using the mRS score. A score of ≤4 on the mRS was considered a favourable outcome.

Statistical Analysis

The data was entered into Microsoft excel software and then processed with statistical software programs, Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software version 16.0 and Epi Info version 7.0. Present study utilised the paired t-test to analyse the functional outcomes of patients at admission, discharge, 3-month, and six-month follow-up, using the mRS as the tool of evaluation. In addition, the Chi-square test was employed to examine the patient characteristics (age, sex, timing of surgery, co-morbidities like hypertension, DM, dyslipidemia, history of tobacco and alcohol intake, GCS, NIHSS score, and midline shift on radiological imaging) that was associated with good/bad neurological outcomes.

Results

A total of 25 cases underwent surgery and were subsequently followed-up. There were 19 male and 6 female patients in the study and the male-female ratio was 3.1:1. The most common age groups were 61-65 years (24%) and 26-30 years (24%) with a mean age of 47.12 years (Table/Fig 4).

Most of the patients i.e., 20 (80%) were having MCA territory infarction while 5 (20%) had ICA territory infarction in their radiological studies. The cause of stroke could not be determined in 13 (52%) patients, either because their condition did not permit it or because the cause could not be identified (Table/Fig 5). A thorough medical history, including evaluation of risk factors for cardiovascular disease, combined with diagnostic imaging modalities such as CT scan, MRI, and carotid artery colour doppler, as well as an Electrocardiogram (ECG) and 2-dimensional Echocardiography (2D ECHO), helped to differentiate between brain infarcts caused by emboli and by thrombosis.

Most of the patients, 17 (68%) presented with NIHSS Score >21 (severe stroke) while 8 patients (32%) presented with NIHSS score of 16-20 (moderate to severe stroke). It was observed that 17 patients, constituting 68% of the total, had a GCS score ranging from 9-13 (Table/Fig 6).

Most of the patients 23 (92%), had an mRS score of 5, while only two (8%) patients had an mRS score of 4 on admission (Table/Fig 7). The maximum hospital stay was 22 days and the minimum hospital stay was three days, with an average of 12.5 days. The average Intensive Care Unit (ICU) stay was seven days, with a minimum stay of two days and a maximum stay of 12 days.

A total of 8 (32%) patients died during hospitalisation while receiving treatment. Two patients died on the 7th postoperative day due to respiratory infection and ventilator-associated pneumonia while one patient died on the 8th postoperative day due to septicaemia. Two patients developed pulmonary embolism on the 5th and 6th postoperative day, respectively, and did not survive. Another two patients developed acute myocardial infarction on the 3rd and 5th postoperative day, respectively. One patient cause of death was unclear, but it was suspected that multiple age related co-morbidities contributed, and they passed away on the 9th postoperative day.

At the time of discharge, 28% of patients had a mRS score of 4 or less. At three months follow-up, 36% of patients had a score of 4 or less, and 48% had a score of 4 or less on six months follow-up (Table/Fig 8).

Among these variables, univariate analysis was done using the Chi-square test, which showed that there was a statistically significant association (p-value <0.05) between hypertension and age >45 years with poor outcomes at the time of discharge (Table/Fig 9).

Total of 17 (68%) Patients were available for follow-up at three months. All variables mentioned at the time of discharge including carotid atherosclerosis while excluding the hemisphere involved (right or left) and artery involved (ICA or MCA), were again analysed using Chi-square test to look for association with outcome. Age >45 years, presence of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, carotid atherosclerosis, history of alcoholism and tobacco chewing had showed significant association (p-value <0.05) with the poor functional outcome at three months follow-up (Table/Fig 10).

A total of 16 (64%) patients were available for follow-up at six months while one patient expired during home care. All variables mentioned at the time of discharge were again analysed using the Chi-square test except the hemisphere involved (right or left), artery involved, and midline shift to look for association with outcome. Female sex, presence of coronary artery disease, history of alcoholism and chewing tobacco showed significant association (p-value <0.05) with the poor functional outcome at six months follow-up (Table/Fig 11).

There was statistical significant difference between mRS on admission and mRS at three months (p-value=0.002), mRS on admission and mRS at six months (p-value=0.001), mRS on discharge and mRS at six months (p-value=0.004), and mRS at three months and mRS at six months (p-value=0.014) (Table/Fig 12).

Discussion

The present study enrolled 25 patients who underwent decompressive hemicraniectomy for unilateral supratentorial hemispheric infarcts. Of the total, 19 (76%) were males and 6 (24%) were females. In the study by Pillai A et al., 26 patients were included, out of which 22 were males and four were females (25). The DESTINY trial had a surgical group of 17 patients, all of whom were below the age of 60 years (range, 30-60 years) with a mean age of 42.7 years and 47% of them being males (26).

In the present study, 13 (52%) patients presented with right hemispheric involvement with left side hemiparesis to complete hemiplegia with cognitive impairments while 12 (48%) patients presented with left hemisphere involvement infarcts with aphasia and right side hemiparesis to complete hemiplegia. Kilincer C et al., reported that among the 36 patients, 49.5% had the infarct located in the dominant hemisphere, and there was no significant predilection of either hemisphere (27). In the DESTINY trial, slight predilection towards the dominant hemisphere was observed in 53% of patients (26). The present study found that 14 (56%) out of 25 patients underwent decompressive hemicraniectomy within 48 hours of symptom onset, while the remaining 11 patients (44%) underwent the surgery after 48 hours of symptom onset. The time range was 20-96 hours while mean was 50.64 hours. In the DESTINY trial, the mean timing of onset of surgery was 24 hours (range 13.9-36.6 hours), while in the HAMLET trial (28), for patients operated within 48 hours, the mean interval from onset to surgery was 31 hours (28).

In present study, the leading cause of stroke was undetermined aetiology (either unknown or pending further investigations to confirm aetiology) in 13 (52%) patients, followed by large vessel atherosclerosis in 8 (32%) patients, and emboli due to cardiac disease in 4 (16%) patients. Bhatia R et al., reported that 58.3% of their stroke patients had undetermined causes and required further evaluation, while 27.7% had cardioembolic strokes, which was the next most common cause of stroke (29). Chung JW et al., found that MCA territory infarcts were caused by cardiac emboli in 28.6% of patients, and ACA territory infarcts in only 10% of patients (30). They also found that undetermined causes accounted for 35.5% of patients with MCA infarcts.

The present study showed a mortality rate of 32% during hospitalisation and one patient died during follow-up after three months. Other trials like the Hemicraniectomy and Durotomy Upon Deterioration from Infarction-Related Swelling Trial (HeADDFIRST) trial (31) had a mortality rate of 25%, Decompressive Craniectomy In Malignant MCA Infarction (DECIMAL) trial had a mortality rate of 25%, DECIMAL trial had 25%, Hemicraniectomy After Middle Cerebral Artery infarction with Life-threatening Edema Trial (HAMLET) had 16%, and DESTINY trial had 18% mortality at discharge or during the first month of follow-up (26),(28),(31),(32). According to Zhao J et al., patients as old as 80 years can benefit from this procedure (33). Out of the eight patients who died during discharge in the present study, four were below 60 years of age and four were above 60 years. The deaths in our study were primarily attributed to medical co-morbidities, which tend to increase with age. Therefore, age and medical co-morbidities should be taken into consideration when analysing the outcomes of the procedure.

In the present study, a favourable outcome was defined as an mRS score of ≤4. At the time of discharge, 7 (28%) patients had an mRS score of ≤4, which increased to 9 (36%) patients at the 3-month follow-up, and 12 (48%) patients at the 6-month follow-up. In the HAMLET trial, DECIMAL trial and, DESTINY trial, the percentage of patients with an mRS score of <4 at the end of 12 months of follow-up was approximately 75% [26,28,32]. Similarly, in the study conducted by Daou B et al., almost 66% of patients had an mRS score of <4 at 90 days of follow-up (34). In the study by Kiphuth IC et al., 60% of patients had an mRS score of <4 at six months and 65% at 1-year follow-up (35).

At six months of follow-up; sex, coronary artery atherosclerosis, tobacco chewing and alcohol consumption were associated with poor functional outcomes. Several studies, such as HAMLET, DECIMAL and, DESTINY trials, have identified age >60 years as a predictor of poor short-term outcomes and excluded patients above this age from their study (26),(28),(32). However, according to Zhao J et al., the benefits of the procedure may extend to patients aged 80 years and above. Pillai A et al., reported in their study that pre-existing hypertension is significantly associated with mortality (25). In the present study, prior history of hypertension was associated with mortality and poor functional outcome. Daou B et al., noted in their study that a prior history of coronary heart disease and DM are associated with poor outcomes (34). The present study was compared with previous studies in (Table/Fig 13) (25),(26),(32),(36),(37),(38).

Limitation(s)

The present study had a few limitations, such as a relatively short follow-up period of six months. Additionally, the home-based care received by the patients may limit the generalisability of this findings to settings where patients receive care in dedicated rehabilitation centres.

Conclusion

Performing DC appears to be a viable option for reducing short-term and long-term neurological damage in patients with supratentorial ischaemic stroke, thereby increasing their chances of survival and achieving acceptable functional outcomes. The present study revealed that patients undergoing DC for supratentorial ischaemic infarct had poor outcomes if they were above the age of 45 years, had coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, or a history of alcohol and tobacco consumption.

References

1.
Aho K, Harmsen P, Hatano S, Marquardsen J, Smirnov VE, Strasser T. Cerebrovascular disease in the community: Results of a WHO collaborative study. Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 1980;58(1):113-30.
2.
Feigin VL, Lawes CMM, Bennett DA, Barker-Collo SL, Parag V. Worldwide stroke incidence and early case fatality reported in 56 population-based studies: A systematic review. Lancet Neurol. 2009;8:355-69.[crossref][PubMed]
3.
Kuriakose D, Xiao Z. Pathophysiology and treatment of stroke: Present status and future perspectives. Int J Mol Sci. 2020;21(20):7609. Doi: 10.3390/ IJMS21207609. PMID: 33076218; PMCID: PMC7589849. [crossref][PubMed]
4.
Lekic T, Krafft PR, Coats JS, Obenaus A, Tang J, Zhang JH. Infratentorial strokes for posterior circulation folks: Clinical correlations for current translational therapeutics. Transl Stroke Res. 2011;2:144-51. https://Doi.Org/10.1007/ S12975-011-0068-2. [crossref][PubMed]
5.
Flaherty ML, Haverbusch M, Sekar P, Kissela B, Kleindorfer D, Moomaw CJ, et al. Long-term mortality after intracerebral hemorrhage. Neurology. 2006;66(8):1182-86. [crossref][PubMed]
6.
Tuhrim S. Intracerebral hemorrhage-improving outcome by reducing volume? N Engl J Med. 2008;358(20):2174-76. [crossref][PubMed]
7.
Malhotra K, Gornbein J, Saver JL. Ischemic strokes due to large-vessel occlusions contribute disproportionately to stroke-related dependence and death: A review. Frontneurol. 2017;8:651. [crossref][PubMed]
8.
Moulin De, Lo R, Chiang J, Barnett HJM. Prognosis in middle cerebral artery occlusion. Stroke. 1985;16:282-84. [crossref][PubMed]
9.
Bamford J, Sandercock P, Dennis M, Burn J, Warlow C. Classification and natural history of clinical identifiable subtypes of cerebral infarction. The Lancet. 1991;337(8756):1521-26. Doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(91)93206-O. [crossref][PubMed]
10.
Rai AT, Seldon AE, Boo S, Link PS, Domico JR, Tarabishy AR, et al. A population- based incidence of acute large vessel occlusions and thrombectomy eligible patients indicates significant potential for growth of endovascular stroke therapy in the USA. J Neuro Intervent Surg. 2017;9(8):722-26. [crossref][PubMed]
11.
Lyden PD, Marler JR. Acute medical therapy. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 1999;9:139-45. [crossref][PubMed]
12.
Qureshi AI, Suarez JI, Yahia AM, Mohammad Y, Uzun G, Suri MF, et al. Timing of neurologic deterioration in massive middle cerebral artery infarction: A multicenter review. Crit Care Med. 2003;31(1):272-77. [crossref][PubMed]
13.
Dalal PM. Stroke in India: Issues in primary and secondary prevention. Neurol India. 2002;50:02-07.
14.
Smith WS, Lev MH, English JD, Camargo EC, Chou M, Claiborne Johnston S, et al. Significance of large vessel intracranial occlusion causing acute ischemic stroke and TIA. Stroke. 2009;40(12):3834-40. [crossref][PubMed]
15.
Woertgen C, Erban P, Rothoerl RD, Bein T, Horn M, Brawanski A. Quality of life after decompressive craniectomy in patients suffering from supratentorial brain ischemia. Acta Neurochir. 2004;146:691-95. [crossref][PubMed]
16.
Cho DY, Chen TC, Lee HC. Ultra-early decompressive craniectomy for malignant middle cerebral artery infarction. Surg Neurol. 2003;60:227-32. [crossref][PubMed]
17.
Schwab S, Steiner T, Aschoff A, Schwarz S, Steiner HH, Jansen O, et al. Early hemicraniectomy in patients with complete middle cerebral artery infarction. Stroke. 1998;29:1888-93. [crossref][PubMed]
18.
Mori K, Nakao Y, Yamamoto T, Maeda M. Early external decompressive craniectomy with duroplasty improves functional recovery in patients with massive hemispheric embolic infarction: Timing and indication of decompressive surgery for malignant cerebral infarction. Surg Neurol. 2004;62:420-29. [crossref][PubMed]
19.
Yang X, Yao Y, Hu W, Li G, Xu JF, Zhao XQ, et al. Is decompressive craniectomy for malignant middle cerebral artery infarction of any worth? J Zhejiang Univ Sci B. 2005;6:644-49. [crossref][PubMed]
20.
Silver FL, Norris JW, Lewis AJ, Hachinski VC. Early mortality following stroke: A prospective review. Stroke. 1984;15:492-96. [crossref][PubMed]
21.
Heinsius T, Bogousslavsky J, Van Melle G. Large infarcts in the middle cerebral artery territory. Etiology and outcome patterns [Published Erratum Appears In Neurology 1998;50(6):1940-43] [See Comments]. Neurology. 1998;50:341-50. [crossref][PubMed]
22.
Teasdale G, Jennett B. Assessment of coma and impaired consciousness. A practical scale. Lancet. 1974;304(7872):81-84. [crossref][PubMed]
23.
Rankin J. Cerebral vascular accidents in patients over the age of 60. Edinburgh Medical Journal. 1957;64(4):200-25. [crossref][crossref]13432835
24.
Sims JR, Gharai LR, Schaefer PW, Vangel M, Rosenthal ES, Lev MH, et al. Abc/2 for rapid clinical estimate of infarct, perfusion, and mismatch volumes. Neurology. 2009;72(24):2104-10. Doi: 10.1212/WNL.0B013E3181AA5329. PMID: 19528517; PMCID: PMC2697964. [crossref][PubMed]
25.
Pillai A, Menon SK, Kumar S, Rajeev K, Kumar A, Panikar D. Decompressive hemicraniectomy in malignant middle cerebral artery infarction: An analysis of long-term outcome and factors in patient selection. J Neurosurg. 2007;106(1):59-65. [crossref][PubMed]
26.
Jüttler E, Schwab S, Schmiedek P, Unterberg A, Hennerici M, Woitzik J, et al. Decompressive surgery for the treatment of malignant infarction of the middle cerebral artery (destiny): A randomised, controlled trial. Stroke. 2007;38:2518- 25. Doi: 10.1161/strokeaha.107.485649. [crossref][PubMed]
27.
Kilincer C, Asil T, Utku U, Hamamcioglu MK, Turgut N, Hicdonmez T, et al. Factors affecting the outcome of decompressive craniectomy for large hemispheric infarctions: A prospective cohort study. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2005;147(6):587-94. [crossref][PubMed]
28.
Hofmeijer J, Kappelle LJ, Algra A, Amelink GJ, Van Gijn J, Van Der Worp HB. Surgical decompression for space-occupying cerebral infarction (the hemicraniectomy after middle cerebral artery infarction with life-threatening edema trial hamlet): A multicentre, open, randomised trial. Lancet Neurol. 2009;8:326-33. Doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(09)70047-X. [crossref][PubMed]
29.
Bhatia R, Padma Srivastava M, Prasad K, Rai V, Rai N, Singh S, et al. Long- term outcome of decompressive hemicraniectomy in patients with malignant middle cerebral artery infarction: A prospective observational study. Neurol India [Internet]. 2014;62(1):26. Available from: http://www.neurologyindia.com/ text. asp?2014/62/1/26/128273. [crossref][PubMed]
30.
Chung JW, Park SH, Kim N, Kim WJ, Park JH, Ko Y, et al. Trial of Org 1017 In Acute Stroke Treatment (TOAST) classification and vascular territory of ischemic stroke lesions diagnosed by diffusion-weighted imaging. J Am Heart Assoc. 2014;3(4):01-09. [crossref][PubMed]
31.
Frank JI, Schumm LP, Wroblewski K, Chyatte D, Rosengart AJ, Kordeck C, et al. Hemicraniectomy and durotomy upon deterioration from the infarction-related swelling trial: Randomised pilot clinical trial. Stroke. 2014;45(3):781-87. [crossref][PubMed]
32.
Vahedi K, Hofmeijer J, Juettler E, Vicaut E, George B, Algra A, et al. Early decompressive surgery in malignant infarction of the middle cerebral artery: A pooled analysis of three randomised controlled trials. Lancet Neurol. 2007;6(3):215-22. [crossref][PubMed]
33.
Zhao J, Su YY, Zhang Y, Zhang YZ, Zhao R, Wang L, et al. Decompressive hemicraniectomy in malignant middle cerebral artery infarct: A randomised controlled trial enrolling patients up to 80-year-old. Neurocrit Care. 2012;17:161- 71. Doi: 10.1007/S12028-012-9703-3. [crossref][PubMed]
34.
Daou B, Kent AP, Montano M, Chalouhi N, Starke RM, Tjoumakaris S, et al. Decompressive hemicraniectomy: Predictors of functional outcome in patients with ischemic stroke. J Neurol Su. 2015;124(JUNE):01-07. [crossref][PubMed]
35.
Kiphuth IC, Köhrmann M, Lichy C, Schwab S, Huttner HB. Hemicraniectomy for malignant middle cerebral artery infarction: Retrospective consent to decompressive surgery depends on functional long-term outcome. Neurocrit Care [INTERNET]. 2010;13(3):380-84: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12028-010-9449-8. [crossref][PubMed]
36.
Rai VK, Bhatia R, Prasad K, Padma Srivastava MV, Singh S, Rai N, et al. Long- term outcome of decompressive hemicraniectomy in patients with malignant middle cerebral artery infarction: A prospective observational study. Neurol India. 2014;62(1):26-31. Doi: 10.4103/0028-3886.128273. PMID: 24608450. [crossref][PubMed]
37.
Slezins J, Keris V, Bricis R, Millers A, Valeinis E, Stukens J, et al. Preliminary results of randomised controlled study on decompressive craniectomy in treatment of malignant middle cerebral artery stroke. Medicina (Kaunas). 2012;48(10):521-24. PMID: 23324248. [crossref]
38.
Bansal H, Chaudhary A, Singh A, Paul B, Garg R. Decompressive craniectomy in malignant middle cerebral artery infarct: An institutional experience. Asian J Neurosurg. 2015;10(3):203-06. Doi: 10.4103/1793-5482.161191. PMID: 26396607; PMCID: PMC4553732.[crossref][PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2023/62707.17747

Date of Submission: Jan 06, 2023
Date of Peer Review: Feb 01, 2023
Date of Acceptance: Mar 04, 2023
Date of Publishing: Apr 01, 2023

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. Yes

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Jan 10, 2023
• Manual Googling: Feb 04, 2023
• iThenticate Software: Mar 03, 2023 (8%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com