Hemicraniectomy in Malignant Middle Cerebral Artery Infarction
2011; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; Volume: 42; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1161/strokeaha.110.605642
ISSN1524-4628
Autores Tópico(s)Neurological Complications and Syndromes
ResumoHomeStrokeVol. 42, No. 2Hemicraniectomy in Malignant Middle Cerebral Artery Infarction Free AccessReview ArticlePDF/EPUBAboutView PDFView EPUBSections ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload citationsTrack citationsPermissionsDownload Articles + Supplements ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyReddit Jump toSupplementary MaterialsFree AccessReview ArticlePDF/EPUBHemicraniectomy in Malignant Middle Cerebral Artery Infarction Dimitre Staykov, MD and Rishi Gupta, MD Dimitre StaykovDimitre Staykov From the Department of Neurology (D.S.), University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany; and the Departments of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Radiology (R.G.), Emory University School of Medicine, Marcus Stroke and Neuroscience Center, Grady Memorial Hospital, Atlanta, GA. and Rishi GuptaRishi Gupta From the Department of Neurology (D.S.), University of Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany; and the Departments of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Radiology (R.G.), Emory University School of Medicine, Marcus Stroke and Neuroscience Center, Grady Memorial Hospital, Atlanta, GA. Originally published6 Jan 2011https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.605642Stroke. 2011;42:513–516Other version(s) of this articleYou are viewing the most recent version of this article. Previous versions: January 1, 2011: Previous Version 1 The concept of decompressive surgery for treatment of elevated intracranial pressure has been developed already in the beginning of the 20th century.1 The rationale of this treatment modality consists of opening of the skull and removal of a bone flap to allow the edematous brain to swell outward, thereby preventing intracranial tissue shifts and life-threatening downward herniation. The use of decompressive hemicraniectomy (DHC) in the context of ischemic brain edema had been reported already in 1956.2 Since that time, DHC has been increasingly studied in the setting of different conditions, including traumatic brain injury, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and malignant middle cerebral artery (MCA) infarction.Depending on the location of the affected area, different surgical decompression techniques have been developed. In the presence of diffuse brain edema without a midline shift, as commonly seen in traumatic brain injury, bilateral (eg, bifrontal) craniectomy has been advocated. Hemicraniectomy, or removal of a frontotemporoparietal bone flap, is suitable in patients with unilateral hemisphere swelling as seen after ischemic stroke.3 Accumulating experience with DHC over the years has led to increasing refinement of the surgical technique. The size of the removed bone fragment has been recognized as a factor of crucial importance for generation of a sufficient decompressive effect.4 Hemicraniectomy with a diameter of ≤10 cm, especially in combination with sharp trepanation edges, has been associated with an increased incidence of shearing injury to the herniated brain.4 Furthermore, dural opening, usually followed by insertion of a dural graft (duraplasty), has meanwhile become an integral part of the decompressive surgery technique.3Predictors of Malignant Cerebral EdemaEarly identification of patients who are most likely to develop malignant edema after MCA infarction based on clinical, radiographic, anatomic, and laboratory values can aid the clinician in offering DHC early. Previously published predictors of a National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score of >20, thrombus at the carotid terminus location, presence of nausea and vomiting, elevations of the white blood cell count, early involvement of >50% of the MCA territory on CT, and additional involvement of the anterior cerebral artery territory and/or posterior cerebral artery territory may be clinical tools to identify high-risk patients.5,6 Involvement of the anterior choroidal artery can be subtle in the setting of a large infarct, but involvement of the uncus of the temporal lobe may lead to more rapid herniation.7 Although clinically easy to use, the positive predictive value of these variables is low.Serum S100B is an astroglial protein that is released during neuronal injury and enters the peripheral bloodstream through an incompetent blood–brain barrier. Thresholds of S100B levels can be monitored at time points in the acute period to determine patients most likely to develop malignant edema. Single measurements obtained in the 12- to 24-hour time period may be a useful tool to identify high-risk patients. At 24 hours, a value of 1.03 μg/L has 94% sensitivity and 83% specificity for detection of malignant cerebral edema.8The availability of MRI in the acute period may allow for more precise volumetric analysis of the infarct. A MRI diffusion-weighted imaging volume of >82 cm3 when performed 145 cm3 obtained before 14 hours was associated with 100% sensitivity and 94% specificity in a small cohort of patients.10 The differences in the sensitivities are likely due to the timing of obtaining the MRI. Such volumetric analysis can be complicated by the presence of an arterial occlusion that is yet to be reperfused through intravenous thrombolysis or intra-arterial treatment. Moreover, when such treatments are used and successful reperfusion occurs, there may be concerns of reperfusion injury that may potentially lead to exacerbation of the edema.11 Nonetheless, MRI volumetric analysis appears to have a high specificity to detect patients at highest risk but must be considered in the context of treatment strategies being used.Such analyses have allowed for better determination of patients who would most benefit from DHC. Randomized controlled studies have used such predictors as inclusion criteria in trial design.Hemicraniectomy for Malignant MCA Infarction: Randomized Controlled TrialsBased on the promising results of experimental research and nonrandomized studies on hemicraniectomy in malignant MCA infarction, 5 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been initiated in the past decade (Table), and meanwhile, the results of the 3 European RCTs (DECIMAL [DEcompressive Craniectomy In MALignant middle cerebral artery infarcts]12; DESTINY [DEcompressive Surgery for the Treatment of malignant Infarction of the middle cerebral artery]13; HAMLET [Hemicraniectomy After Middle cerebral artery infarction with Life-threatening Edema Trial]14) and 2 pooled meta-analyses14,15 have been published. The North American HeADDFIRST study (Hemicraniectomy And Durotomy on Deterioration From Infarction Related Swelling Trial) has been completed but data have not been published yet and the Philippine HeMMI trial (Hemicraniectomy for Malignant Middle cerebral artery Infarcts) is still recruiting patients.Table. Prospective RCTs on Hemicraniectomy in Malignant MCA InfarctionStudy NameInclusion CriteriaPrimary Outcome MeasureMortality and Outcome (Hemicraniectomy Versus Conservative)No.Mean Age, yearsMortality,%Good Outcome, %DECIMAL12Age 18–55 years within 24 hours from symptom onsetmRS <4 at 6 months20 versus 1843.5 versus 43.425.0 versus 77.850.0 versus 22.2DESTINY13Age 18–60 years 12–36 hours from symptom onset to surgerymRS <4 at 6 months17 versus 1543.2 versus 53.317.6 versus 53.047.1 versus 26.7HAMLET14Age 18–60 years within 96 hours from symptom onsetmRS 4 with a number needed to treat=2. Surgery, however, did not lead to a significant benefit in functional outcome when dichotomization between a mRS of 0 to 3 and 4 to 6 after 12 months was chosen (absolute risk reduction, 16.3%; 95% CI, −0.1 to 33.1). Reduction in mortality with surgical treatment was accompanied by an increase in moderate severe disability (mRS of 4) in survivors.Complications Associated With HemicraniectomySurgical and medical complications associated with DHC may impact the clinical outcomes of patients. Immediate surgical complications include: insufficient decompression,4 surgical site infections,16 hemorrhagic complications, and contralateral subdural effusions.17 Delayed complications include the sinking flap syndrome,18 extra-axial fluid collections, hydrocephalus,19 and development of subdural hematomas.The rates of infections at the time of DHC or replacement of the bone flap range from 5% to 10%. Infection rates at the time of cranioplasty may be related to the type of bone flap used.16 Synthetic materials used as flaps may lead to a foreign body reaction, whereas autologous bone flaps may be associated with higher rates of infection.16,20 Unfortunately there is no consensus as to which approach is associated with a higher likelihood of infections.The sinking flap syndrome is felt to occur as a result of the pressure gradient between the atmospheric pressure and intracranial vault. This leads to severe headaches, changes in mentation, and seizures.18 Focal neurological deficits may result due to reductions in cerebral blood flow in the infarcted region that may be viable21 or due to a mass effect on the contralateral hemisphere. Rarely, this can lead to death from "paradoxical herniation." In a recent prospective cohort, 11% of patients developed symptomatic sinking flap syndrome that was associated with delays in replacement of the bone flap, older age, and larger initial infarct volume.22 Placing patients supine often relieves the clinical symptoms with replacement of the bone flap being curative.The development of communicating hydrocephalus as a result of DHC may be a common occurrence.19 The distinction between radiographic ventriculomegaly and clinically symptomatic hydrocephalus may account for the varied experiences among institutions.23 This phenomenon may occur due to the altered hydrodynamics of the intracranial vault that has been disrupted after DHC. Extracranial fluid collections are frequently noted and are a result of overaccumulation of cerebrospinal fluid either due to poor reabsorption or space availability for fluid accumulation. These collections often signify the presence of hydrocephalus and are associated with neurological decline in mentation. The treatment for this includes cerebrospinal fluid diversion with an external ventricular catheter or repeated lumbar punctures. Delays in replacing the bone flap appear to be the most significant predictor of the development of hydrodynamic complications but are complicated by the fact that delays in replacement may be due to the degree of swelling initially noted.19In-hospital medical complications due to patient immobility and survival from the DHC can impact the clinical outcomes of the patient. A National Inpatient Sample database over a 6-year period in the United States found the rates of pneumonia to be 11.1%, gastrointestinal bleeding 2.4%, and sepsis 4.76% in 252 patients studied. Each of these complications was associated with an increased rate of mortality and were significantly higher compared with patients with a similar comorbidity index.24Unanswered Questions and Future DirectionsFunctional Outcome and Quality of LifeEarly hemicraniectomy significantly reduces mortality after malignant MCA infarction; however, it also increases the probability of survival with moderately severe disability (mRS of 4). With approximately 40% of survivors becoming disabled after decompressive surgery, the question arises if a mRS of 4 (unable to walk without assistance and unable to attend to own bodily needs without assistance) can be considered a favorable outcome. Looking at motor function, the benefit of surviving malignant MCA infarction after hemicraniectomy seems to be largely outweighed by the high incidence of moderately severe or severe disability in survivors.25 However, the more important question is if the mRS is an adequate outcome measure in those patients. From the patients' perspective, neuropsychological deficits, aphasia, or depression may have an equally strong impact on quality of life as compared with motor function. Other factors such as psychosocial environment, caregiver burden, familial support, and financial support should be additionally considered in this context. The prospective trials and pooled analyses published to date12–15 do not provide conclusive results on quality of life and depression in patients who survived malignant MCA infarction after surgery, and those aspects certainly deserve further investigation.Timing of SurgeryFrom the pathophysiological point of view, earlier decompression should prevent brain tissue damage by avoiding or reducing exposition to increased intracranial pressure in the course of development of ischemic brain edema. On the other hand, poststroke edema often peaks later than 48 hours after symptom onset. Therefore, there might be a wider time window within which decompressive surgery may be beneficial for such patients. This aspect has not been sufficiently addressed in the 3 European RCTs. The pooled analysis from 2007 could not demonstrate any difference in functional outcome, comparing patients treated earlier versus later than 24 hours after symptom onset15; however, all patients included in that analysis were treated within 48 hours. The HAMLET study allowed delayed surgery up to 96 hours after stroke onset, and secondary outcome analyses showed that surgery within 48 hours significantly reduced the probability of severe disability or death (mRS 5 or 6), whereas delayed hemicraniectomy did not influence outcome.14 However, considering the small number of patients who received surgery beyond 48 hours (n=11), no final conclusion can be drawn. Further data on timing of decompressive surgery are derived from observational studies, which have brought up contradictory results. Although some studies report reduced mortality and improved outcome with early treatment, as compared with treatment after clinical deterioration,26–28 a systematic review published in 2004, including all data reported up to that date, could not confirm this finding.29 This issue certainly deserves further investigation to identify the optimal time window for decompressive surgery after malignant MCA infarction. In the absence of other conclusive data and considering the findings reported from RCTs as well as the pathophysiological background, at present, early decompression ( 60 years. Because a considerable proportion of the patients experiencing this type of stroke belong to this age cohort,30 it still remains unclear if those patients would benefit from surgical treatment. Data from observational studies indicate that hemicraniectomy may lead to improved survival, however, at the cost of poor outcome and functional dependency in patients >60 years of age.30,31 Moreover, age was identified as a major factor influencing outcome in a systematic review of 138 patients treated with hemicraniectomy.29 This finding could not be confirmed in the pooled meta-analysis of the 3 European RCTs published in 2007.15 The HAMLET trial even found a trend toward better outcome in the upper age range (51 to 60 years) as compared with younger patients treated with hemicraniectomy.14 In light of those data, the results of the ongoing DESTINY 2 trial, studying hemicraniectomy in patients >60 years, are awaited and will hopefully provide more information on this issue.Treatment of Dominant Hemisphere InfarctionThe debate whether to perform decompressive craniectomy in patients with malignant MCA infarction on the speech-dominant hemisphere is based on the assumption that in the presence of aphasia, functional outcome and quality of life may be worse as compared with patients with nondominant infarction. This assumption, however, is currently not supported by data available in the literature, because mortality, functional outcome, and quality of life do not seem to depend on whether the dominant hemisphere is involved.15,29 On the contrary, neuropsychological deficits seen in patients with infarcts on the nondominant hemisphere, as attention deficits or depression, may be as disabling as aphasia.32 However, this question has not been sufficiently elucidated yet and certainly deserves further study.ConclusionsPredictive models of patients who may require DHC are improving through volumetric analysis based on MRI and serum markers to assess for neuronal injury. Although several RCTs have not been completed, DHC is a life-saving surgery that appears to benefit younger patients the most. Further study is required to better elucidate quality-of-life outcome measures, timing of surgery, and treatment of the dominant hemisphere.DisclosuresR.G. is a consultant/scientific advisory board for Concentric Medical, Rapid Medical, Neurointerventions, and CoAxia Inc.FootnotesCorrespondence to Rishi Gupta, MD, Departments of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Radiology, Emory University School of Medicine, Marcus Stroke and Neuroscience Center, Grady Memorial Hospital, 80 Jesse Hill Jr Drive, SE, Faculty Office Building 393, Atlanta, GA 30303. E-mail Rishi.[email protected]eduReferences1. Cushing H. The establishment of cerebral hernia as a decompressive measure for inaccessible brain tumors; with the description of intermuscular methods of making the bone defect in temporal and occipital regions. Surg Gynecol Obstet.1905; 1:297–314Google Scholar2. Scarcella G. Encephalomalacia simulating the clinical and radiological aspects of brain tumor; a report of 6 cases. J Neurosurg.1956; 13:278–292CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3. Hutchinson P, Timofeev I, Kirkpatrick P. Surgery for brain edema. Neurosurg Focus.2007; 22:E14CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar4. Wagner S, Schnippering H, Aschoff A, Koziol JA, Schwab S, Steiner T. Suboptimum hemicraniectomy as a cause of additional cerebral lesions in patients with malignant infarction of the middle cerebral artery. J Neurosurg.2001; 94:693–696CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5. Krieger DW, Demchuk AM, Kasner SE, Jauss M, Hantson L. Early clinical and radiological predictors of fatal brain swelling in ischemic stroke. Stroke.1999; 30:287–292LinkGoogle Scholar6. Kasner SE, Demchuk AM, Berrouschot J, Schmutzhard E, Harms L, Verro P, Chalela JA, Abbur R, McGrade H, Christou I, Krieger DW. Predictors of fatal brain edema in massive hemispheric ischemic stroke. Stroke.2001; 32:2117–2123LinkGoogle Scholar7. Maramattom BV, Bahn MM, Wijdicks EF. Which patient fares worse after early deterioration due to swelling from hemispheric stroke? Neurology.2004; 63:2142–2145CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar8. Foerch C, Otto B, Singer OC, Neumann-Haefelin T, Yan B, Berkefeld J, Steinmetz H, Sitzer M. Serum S100B predicts a malignant course of infarction in patients with acute middle cerebral artery occlusion. Stroke.2004; 35:2160–2164LinkGoogle Scholar9. Thomalla G, Hartmann F, Juettler E, Singer OC, Lehnhardt FG, Kohrmann M, Kersten JF, Krutzelmann A, Humpich MC, Sobesky J, Gerloff C, Villringer A, Fiehler J, Neumann-Haefelin T, Schellinger PD, Rother J. Prediction of malignant middle cerebral artery infarction by magnetic resonance imaging within 6 hours of symptom onset: a prospective multicenter observational study. Ann Neurol.2010; 68:435–445CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar10. Oppenheim C, Samson Y, Manai R, Lalam T, Vandamme X, Crozier S, Srour A, Cornu P, Dormont D, Rancurel G, Marsault C. Prediction of malignant middle cerebral artery infarction by diffusion-weighted imaging. Stroke.2000; 31:2175–2181LinkGoogle Scholar11. Molina CA, Alvarez-Sabin J. Recanalization and reperfusion therapies for acute ischemic stroke. Cerebrovasc Dis.2009; 27(suppl 1):162–167CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar12. Vahedi K, Vicaut E, Mateo J, Kurtz A, Orabi M, Guichard JP, Boutron C, Couvreur G, Rouanet F, Touze E, Guillon B, Carpentier A, Yelnik A, George B, Payen D, Bousser MG. Sequential-design, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial of early decompressive craniectomy in malignant middle cerebral artery infarction (DECIMAL trial). Stroke.2007; 38:2506–2517LinkGoogle Scholar13. Juttler E, Schwab S, Schmiedek P, Unterberg A, Hennerici M, Woitzik J, Witte S, Jenetzky E, Hacke W. Decompressive surgery for the treatment of malignant infarction of the middle cerebral artery (DESTINY): a randomized, controlled trial. Stroke.2007; 38:2518–2525LinkGoogle Scholar14. 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; 8:326–333CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar15. Vahedi K, Hofmeijer J, Juettler E, Vicaut E, George B, Algra A, Amelink GJ, Schmiedeck P, Schwab S, Rothwell PM, Bousser MG, van der Worp HB, Hacke W. Early decompressive surgery in malignant infarction of the middle cerebral artery: a pooled analysis of three randomised controlled trials. Lancet Neurol.2007; 6:215–222CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar16. Chang V, Hartzfeld P, Langlois M, Mahmood A, Seyfried D. Outcomes of cranial repair after craniectomy. J Neurosurg.2010; 112:1120–1124CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar17. Kilincer C, Simsek O, Hamamcioglu MK, Hicdonmez T, Cobanoglu S. Contralateral subdural effusion after aneurysm surgery and decompressive craniectomy: case report and review of the literature. Clin Neurol Neurosurg.2005; 107:412–416CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar18. Akins PT, Guppy KH. Sinking skin flaps, paradoxical herniation, and external brain tamponade: a review of decompressive craniectomy management. Neurocrit Care.2008; 9:269–276CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar19. Waziri A, Fusco D, Mayer SA, McKhann GM, Connolly ES. Postoperative hydrocephalus in patients undergoing decompressive hemicraniectomy for ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke. Neurosurgery. 2007; 61:489–493discussion 493–494CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar20. Vanaclocha V, Bazan A, Saiz-Sapena N, Paloma V, Idoate M. Use of frozen cranial vault bone allografts in the repair of extensive cranial bone defects. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 1997; 139:653–660CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar21. Sakamoto S, Eguchi K, Kiura Y, Arita K, Kurisu K. CT perfusion imaging in the syndrome of the sinking skin flap before and after cranioplasty. Clin Neurol Neurosurg.2006; 108:583–585CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar22. Sarov M, Guichard JP, Chibarro S, Guettard E, Godin O, Yelnik A, George B, Bousser MG, Vahedi K. Sinking skin flap syndrome and paradoxical herniation after hemicraniectomy for malignant hemispheric infarction. Stroke.2010; 41:560–562LinkGoogle Scholar23. Rahme R, Weil AG, Sabbagh M, Moumdjian R, Bouthillier A, Bojanowski MW. Decompressive craniectomy is not an independent risk factor for communicating hydrocephalus in patients with increased intracranial pressure. Neurosurgery. 2010; 67:675–678discussion 678CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar24. Alshekhlee A, Horn C, Jung R, Alawi AA, Cruz-Flores S. In-hospital mortality in acute ischemic stroke treated with hemicraniectomy in us hospitals. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2010Jun22[Epub ahead of print]Google Scholar25. Puetz V, Campos CR, Eliasziw M, Hill MD, Demchuk AM. Assessing the benefits of hemicraniectomy: what is a favourable outcome? Lancet Neurol. 2007; 6:580author reply 580–581CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar26. 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; 62:420–429discussion 429–430MedlineGoogle Scholar27. 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 (Wien). 2004; 146:691–695CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar28. Schwab S, Steiner T, Aschoff A, Schwarz S, Steiner HH, Jansen O, Hacke W. Early hemicraniectomy in patients with complete middle cerebral artery infarction. Stroke.1998; 29:1888–1893LinkGoogle Scholar29. Gupta R, Connolly ES, Mayer S, Elkind MS. Hemicraniectomy for massive middle cerebral artery territory infarction: a systematic review. Stroke.2004; 35:539–543LinkGoogle Scholar30. Holtkamp M, Buchheim K, Unterberg A, Hoffmann O, Schielke E, Weber JR, Masuhr F. Hemicraniectomy in elderly patients with space occupying media infarction: improved survival but poor functional outcome. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry.2001; 70:226–228CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar31. Uhl E, Kreth FW, Elias B, Goldammer A, Hempelmann RG, Liefner M, Nowak G, Oertel M, Schmieder K, Schneider GH. Outcome and prognostic factors of hemicraniectomy for space occupying cerebral infarction. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry.2004; 75:270–274MedlineGoogle Scholar32. Leonhardt G, Wilhelm H, Doerfler A, Ehrenfeld CE, Schoch B, Rauhut F, Hufnagel A, Diener HC. Clinical outcome and neuropsychological deficits after right decompressive hemicraniectomy in MCA infarction. J Neurol.2002; 249:1433–1440CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Previous Back to top Next FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited By Wang Z, Chen M, Wang C, Luo J, Sun S, Lu X and Garg D (2022) Stereotactic Aspiration Acts as an Effective Treatment for Malignant Middle Cerebral Artery Infarction, Journal of Healthcare Engineering, 10.1155/2022/4373404, 2022, (1-7), Online publication date: 16-Apr-2022. Gusdon A, Nyquist P and Nelson S (2020) Management of Elevated Intracranial Pressure Neurointensive Care Unit, 10.1007/978-3-030-36548-6_1, (3-19), . Petcharunpaisan S, Ngernbumrung W and Lerdlum S (2020) Value of computed tomography angiographic collateral status in prediction of malignant middle cerebral artery infarction, The ASEAN Journal of Radiology, 10.46475/aseanjr.2020.01, (4-20), Online publication date: 30-Apr-2020. D. Sukhdeo Singh R, Pandhi A and V. Alexandrov A (2020) Post Stroke Depression New Insight into Cerebrovascular Diseases - An Updated Comprehensive Review, 10.5772/intechopen.86935 Stumpf T, Sandarage R, Galuta A, Fournier P, Li T, Kirkwood K, Yi X, Tsai E and Cao X (2020) Design and evaluation of a biosynthesized cellulose drug releasing duraplasty, Materials Science and Engineering: C, 10.1016/j.msec.2020.110677, 110, (110677), Online publication date: 1-May-2020. Chen M, Yu W, Sun S, Dong C, Huang N, Mao L and Wang H (2019) Stereotactic Aspiration of Necrotic Brain Tissue for Treating Malignant Middle Cerebral Artery Infarction: A Report of 13 Consecutive Cases, World Neurosurgery, 10.1016/j.wneu.2018.10.190, 124, (435-444), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2019. Katz B, Adeoye O, Sucharew H, Broderick J, McMullan J, Khatri P, Widener M, Alwell K, Moomaw C, Kissela B, Flaherty M, Woo D, Ferioli S, Mackey J, Martini S, De Los Rios la Rosa F and Kleindorfer D (2017) Estimated Impact of Emergency Medical Service Triage of Stroke Patients on Comprehensive Stroke Centers, Stroke, 48:8, (2164-2170), Online publication date: 1-Aug-2017. Kufta K, Melean L, Grady M and Panchal N (2017) Massive Middle Cerebral Artery Infarction After Surgically Assisted Rapid Palatal Expansion: A Case Report, Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 10.1016/j.joms.2017.03.036, 75:7, (1529.e1-1529.e8), Online publication date: 1-Jul-2017. Jalan D, Saini N, Zaidi M, Pallottie A, Elkabes S and Heary R Effects of early surgical decompression on functional and histological outcomes after severe experimental thoracic spinal cord injury, Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, 10.3171/2016.6.SPINE16343, 26:1, (62-75) Mian A, Edasery D, Sakai O, Mustafa Qureshi M, Holsapple J and Nguyen T (2017) Radiological imaging features of the basal ganglia that may predict progression to hemicraniectomy in large territory middle cerebral artery infarct, Neuroradiology, 10.1007/s00234-017-1823-1, 59:5, (477-484), Online publication date: 1-May-2017. Moussa W and Khedr W (2016) Decompressive craniectomy and expansive duraplasty with evacuation of hypertensive intracerebral hematoma, a randomized controlled trial, Neurosurgical Review, 10.100
Referência(s)