Ági Oszvald, Hartmut Vatter, Christian Byhahn, Volker Seifert and Erdem Güresir
Quality and safety are basic concerns in any medical practice. Especially in daily surgical practice, with increasing turnover and shortened procedure times, attention to these topics needs to be assured. Starting in 2007, the authors used a perioperative checklist in all elective procedures and extended the checklist in January 2011 according to the so-called team time-out principles, with additional assessment of patient identity and the planned surgical procedure performed immediately before skin incision, including the emergency cases.
The advanced perioperative checklist includes parts for patient identification, preoperative assessments, team time-out, postoperative treatment, and imaging controls. All parts are signed by the responsible physician except for the team time-out, which is performed and signed by the theater nurse on behalf of the surgeon immediately before skin incision.
Between January 2007 and December 2010, 1 wrong-sided bur hole in an emergency case and 1 wrong-sided lumbar approach in an elective case (of 8795 surgical procedures) occurred in the authors' department. Using the advanced perioperative checklist including the team time-out principles, no error occurred in 3595 surgical procedures (January 2011–June 2012). In the authors' department all team members appreciate the chance to focus on the patient, the surgical procedure, and expected difficulties. The number of incomplete checklists and of patients not being transferred into the operating room was lowered significantly (p = 0.002) after implementing the advanced perioperative checklist.
In the authors' daily experience, the advanced perioperative checklist developed according to the team time-out principles improves preoperative workup and the focus of the entire team. The focus is drawn to the procedure, expected difficulties of the surgery, and special needs in the treatment of the particular patient. Especially in emergency situations, the team time-out synchronizes the involved team members and helps to improve patient safety.
Matthias Setzer, Hartmut Vatter, Gerhard Marquardt, Volker Seifert and Frank D. Vrionis
In this report, the authors describe their experience in the surgical management of spinal meningiomas at two neurosurgical centers. The results of a literature review are also presented.
Eighty consecutive patients (22 men and 58 women) with spinal meningiomas who had undergone an operation at two specific neurosurgical centers were included in this study. Functional outcomes were evaluated using univariate and multivariate analyses. A review of the literature yielded an additional 651 patients with spinal meningiomas from 9 large studies.
On multivariate analysis, the variable of a poor preoperative neurological state (p < 0.02, odds ratio [OR] 13.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.6–71.4) and invasion of the arachnoid/pia mater (p < 0.03, OR 15.2, 95% CI 2.5–90.4) were independent predictors of a poor outcome, whereas invasion of the arachnoid/pia (p < 0.02, OR 8.9, 95% CI 2.2–35) and duration of symptoms (p < 0.001, OR 1.12/month, 95% CI 1.05–1.2) predicted no improvement (stable or deteriorated condition). The Cox proportional hazards regression analysis showed three significant predictor variables for recurrence: invasion of the arachnoid/pia (p < 0.05; hazard ratio [HR] 1.8, 95% CI 1.2–3.6), Simpson resection grade (p < 0.012, HR 6.8, 95% CI 1.5–3.0), and histological tumor grade (Grade I; p < 0.001, HR 0.001–0.17).
Because of the excellent outcome of surgery for benign spinal meningiomas and the association between duration of symptoms and neurological compromise with a poor functional outcome, early operation is the treatment of choice. In cases of malignant transformation, adjuvant therapies must be considered.
Erdem Güresir, Patrick Schuss, Hartmut Vatter, Andreas Raabe, Volker Seifert and Jürgen Beck
The aim of this study was to analyze decompressive craniectomy (DC) in the setting of subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) with bleeding, infarction, or brain swelling as the underlying pathology in a large cohort of consecutive patients.
Decompressive craniectomy was performed in 79 of 939 patients with SAH. Patients were stratified according to the indication for DC: 1) primary brain swelling without or 2) with additional intracerebral hematoma, 3) secondary brain swelling without rebleeding or infarcts, and 4) secondary brain swelling with infarcts or 5) with rebleeding. Outcome was assessed according to the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 6 months (mRS Score 0–3 favorable vs 4–6 unfavorable).
Overall, 61 (77.2%) of 79 patients who did and 292 (34%) of the 860 patients who did not undergo DC had a poor clinical grade on admission (World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies Grade IV–V, p < 0.0001). A favorable outcome was attained in 21 (26.6%) of 79 patients who had undergone DC. In a comparison of favorable outcomes in patients with primary (28.0%) or secondary DC (25.5%), no difference could be found (p = 0.8). Subgroup analysis with respect to the underlying indication for DC (brain swelling vs bleeding vs infarction) revealed no difference in the rate of favorable outcomes. On multivariate analysis, acute hydrocephalus (p = 0.009) and clinical signs of herniation (p = 0.02) were significantly associated with an unfavorable outcome.
Based on the data in this study the authors concluded that primary as well as secondary craniectomy might be warranted, regardless of the underlying etiology (hemorrhage, infarction, or brain swelling) and admission clinical grade of the patient. The time from the onset of intractable intracranial pressure to DC seems to be crucial for a favorable outcome, even when a DC is performed late in the disease course after SAH.