Suchergebnisse

Background: Patients' fear of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may delay inevitable treatment, putting potential benefits at risk. This single-center retrospective study aims to analyze temporal relationships of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany with the number of patients who sought and received elective neurosurgical treatment at a German university hospital. Methods: Daily outpatient numbers (ON) and elective procedures (EP) were recorded at our department between 1 January 2020 and 30 June 2020 (baseline: between 1 January 2019 and 30 June 2019). In patients who received EP, we recorded indication, outcome, and length of stay (LOS). Moving averages of ON (MAON) and of EP were calculated. Data on governmental action taken in response to the pandemic and on coronavirus-positive cases in Germany (CPCG) were superimposed. Exponential and arc tangent curves (ATC) were fitted to the absolute numbers of CPCG. Phase shifts were estimated, and Spearman's rank correlation coefficient, rho, was calculated between the 2020 MAON and the derivative function of the fitted ATC (DFATC). Wilcoxon rank sum served as statistical test. Significance was assumed with p values of less than 0.05. Results: ON were significantly decreased in April 2020 as compared to April 2019 (p = 0.010). A phase shift between the German lockdown, the DFATC, and the decrease in MAON was not detected, while a phase shift of 10 days between the DFATC and the subsequent increase in MAON was detected. The DFATC was significantly negatively correlated (rho = −0.92, p < 0.0001) to the MAON until 31 March 2020, and, when shifted by 10 days, the DFATC was significantly negatively correlated (rho = −0.87, p < 0.0001) to the MAON from 01 April 2020. EP (p = 0.023), including the subset of non-oncological EP (p = 0.032), were significantly less performed in the first half of 2020 as compared to the first half of 2019. In March and April 2020, we conducted significantly more EP due to motor deficits (p = 0.0267, and less), visual ...

AbstractObjective The presence of multiple injuries in addition to a traumatic brain injury (TBI) is initially uncertain in most patients with posttraumatic coma. The interdisciplinary team of physicians in charge of initial treatment after hospital admission may face a collision of vital priorities. The purpose of this study was to analyze which diagnostic and surgical measures were given priority over others in comatose patients after injury and to draw conclusions from these data.Methods In this prospective multicenter cohort study, the outcomes of 1,003 comatose patients with suspected multiple injuries were studied. The analysis was divided into an early and a late stage. Diagnostic and surgical measures were analyzed for a 6-month period. The prognostic value of the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies grading scale were investigated.Results Removal of intracranial hematomas and decompressive craniotomies were the most frequent procedures within the first 48 hours after admission to the hospital. Prognosis depends on the location and the combination of injuries. Outcome is significantly correlated to initial signs of brainstem dysfunction. The GCS did not adequately predict clinical outcome.Conclusion Comatose patients with suspected multiple injuries should only be admitted to hospitals with a continuous neurosurgical service because intracranial operations are more frequent in the first 48 hours than extracranial operations. Depending on the neurologic status of the patient, an urgent surgical decompression may be essential for a good outcome. The GCS alone is not a sufficient tool for the neurologic assessment and the prognosis of patients with multiple injuries. The onset of clinical signs of brainstem dysfunction indicates a critical deterioration of the functioning of the central nervous system. The priority of surgical measures should be tailored accordingly.