ライフサイエンスコーパス: decompressive

1 In those patients undergoing decompressive cervical surgery for degenerative disease,

2 tio 8.19, 95% CI 1.60-42.0, p = 0.01), fewer decompressive craniectomies (0% vs 25%, P = 0.02), less

3 p had an mRS score of 0-4 at 90 days without decompressive craniectomy (adjusted odds ratio 0.87, 95%

4 eans of a craniotomy (bone flap replaced) or decompressive craniectomy (bone flap not replaced).

5 Decompressive craniectomy (DC) is often required to mana

6 cohort, 129 of 148 patients (87%) underwent decompressive craniectomy (DC), and 17 of 148 (11%) unde

7 s (odds ratio, 1.7; p < 0.01), and following decompressive craniectomy (odds ratio, 1.8; p < 0.01) we

8 8 mmHg were associated with a lower risk for decompressive craniectomy (p = 0.042, aOR = 0.27), DCI o

9 However, it has not been analyzed if decompressive craniectomy affects traumatic brain injury

10 Decompressive craniectomy and barbiturate coma are often

11 We compared two treatment strategies: decompressive craniectomy and barbiturate coma.

12 Patients who underwent a decompressive craniectomy and duraplasty with DuraGen at

13 outwards and equalizing pressure gradients, decompressive craniectomy appears to significantly reduc

14 At older age, decompressive craniectomy continued to increase survival

15 e: delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI), need for decompressive craniectomy due to increased intracranial

16 Based on available evidence, decompressive craniectomy for the treatment of refractor

17 igned to the craniotomy group and 222 to the decompressive craniectomy group.

18 Decompressive craniectomy has been recommended as a surg

19 such as hypertonic saline administration and decompressive craniectomy have solid foundations and can

20 It is unknown whether decompressive craniectomy improves clinical outcome for

21 iotomy in 245 (73%) of those patients and by decompressive craniectomy in 91 (27%).

22 ence highlighting the benefits and limits of decompressive craniectomy in malignant cerebral infarcti

23 At 6 months, decompressive craniectomy in patients with traumatic bra

24 Decompressive craniectomy in refractory intracranial hyp

25 Our results suggest that decompressive craniectomy is associated with good health

26 Decompressive craniectomy is often required after head t

27 Thus, decompressive craniectomy may have an underestimated the

28 However, decompressive craniectomy might be less economically att

29 The effect of decompressive craniectomy on clinical outcomes in patien

30 Delayed decompressive craniectomy or craniotomy after initial co

31 intracranial pressure (>25 mm Hg) to undergo decompressive craniectomy or receive ongoing medical car

32 life regarding physical status was better in decompressive craniectomy patients (p = 0.025).

33 Eight percent more decompressive craniectomy patients reported good health-

34 ter than or equal to 60 compared with the no decompressive craniectomy patients up to 10 years after

35 f craniectomy are exceptionally relevant for decompressive craniectomy planning.

36 ed in 42 (41%) of 103 participants receiving decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment an

37 42 (44%) of 95 participants assigned to decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment an

38 analysis, 36 (47%) of 77 participants in the decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment gr

39 The SWITCH trial aimed to assess whether decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment in

40 SWITCH provides weak evidence that decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment mi

41 mus were randomly assigned to receive either decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment or

42 ed and 197 gave delayed informed consent (96 decompressive craniectomy plus best medical treatment, 1

43 Decompressive craniectomy prevents intracranial hyperten

44 Decompressive craniectomy resulted in a greater quality-

45 Decompressive craniectomy showed a trend toward better h

46 ent model of post-traumatic brain injury and decompressive craniectomy that incorporates a biphasic,

47 tion to computed tomography in patients with decompressive craniectomy to assess the size of acute he

48 Decompressive craniectomy was associated with an average

49 Decompressive craniectomy was necessary in all initial t

50 cal ventilation was required for 6.9-9 days, decompressive craniectomy was required for 6.25-29.3% of

51 Gemelli" Hospital who underwent decompressive craniectomy were studied.

52 ents were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive a decompressive craniectomy with standard care (surgical g

53 83 (decompressive craniectomy) versus 62 (no decompressive craniectomy) (p = 0.028).

54 62 (no decompressive craniectomy) versus 79 (decompressive craniectomy) (p = 0.06).

55 f Life after Brain Injury total score of 83 (decompressive craniectomy) versus 62 (no decompressive c

56 fe after Brain Injury total scores of 62 (no decompressive craniectomy) versus 79 (decompressive cran

57 groups, stage 3 treatments (barbiturates and decompressive craniectomy) were used if all stage 2 trea

58 amework for further studies (e.g. addressing decompressive craniectomy).

59 reduce brain swelling, decrease the need for decompressive craniectomy, and improve clinical outcomes

60 ubdural hematoma who underwent craniotomy or decompressive craniectomy, disability and quality-of-lif

61 Proper location and size of a decompressive craniectomy, however, remain controversial

62 nnitol use, treatment with barbiturate coma, decompressive craniectomy, number of nonneurosurgical pr

63 ho suffered severe TBI and were subjected to decompressive craniectomy, we used NeuN, a neuronal mark

64 d to identify optimal clinical conditions of decompressive craniectomy.

65 or the brain mechanical response following a decompressive craniectomy.

66 e randomly assigned to undergo craniotomy or decompressive craniectomy.

67 ) score of 0-4 at 90 days without undergoing decompressive craniectomy.

68 pertonic saline; c) mild hypothermia; and d) decompressive craniectomy.

69 e unit, her condition worsened despite early decompressive craniectomy.

70 n 20 mm Hg, use of edema-directed therapies, decompressive craniotomy, or 3-month Glasgow Outcome Sca

71 Early decompressive hemicraniectomy (<or=48 h) should be stron

72 Decompressive hemicraniectomy (DHC) can improve outcomes

73 o experienced maximum midline shift (MLS) or decompressive hemicraniectomy (DHC) in the acute (< 48 h

74 middle cerebral artery (MCA) infarction with decompressive hemicraniectomy (DHC) is uncertain.

75 CT] infarct location, volume and outcomes in decompressive hemicraniectomy [DHC] for MMCA infarction.

76 rials have provided compelling evidence that decompressive hemicraniectomy for large hemispheric infa

77 Early decompressive hemicraniectomy reduces mortality without

78 Competing hazards regression identified age, decompressive hemicraniectomy, and intracranial infectio

79 variables collected during the acute phase: decompressive hemicraniectomy, intracerebral hemorrhage

80 nstrated a substantial survival benefit from decompressive hemicraniectomy, with a number needed to t

81 massive haemorrhagic conversion requiring a decompressive hemicraniectomy.

82 ted death, all-cause death, disposition, and decompressive hemicraniectomy.

83 cerebral artery [MMCA] stroke who underwent decompressive hemicraniectomy.

84 stenosis, 394 (62%) had surgery, most often decompressive laminectomy (320 of 394 [81%]).

85 Treatment was standard decompressive laminectomy (with or without fusion) or us

86 tic lumbar spinal stenosis to undergo either decompressive laminectomy alone (decompression-alone gro

87 Nonoperative care or surgery (primarily decompressive laminectomy for stenosis and decompressive

88 graphic degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis, decompressive laminectomy improved symptoms more than no

89 oy rods) lumbar spinal fusion in addition to decompressive laminectomy in patients with symptomatic l

90 y decompressive laminectomy for stenosis and decompressive laminectomy with fusion for stenosis assoc

91 (IAP) is associated with ICP elevation, and decompressive laparotomy in patients with concurrent ele

92 inferior vena cava (IVC) treated by a portal decompressive procedure that bypassed the obstructed IVC

93 o achieve optimal neurological recovery with decompressive surgery following acute SCI.

94 objectively evaluate the effect of timing of decompressive surgery for acute SCI on long-term neurolo

95 All patients who underwent decompressive surgery for acute SCI within these dataset

96 ical perfusion and CA in patients undergoing decompressive surgery for malignant hemispheric stroke.

97 ive intervention, and to clarify the role of decompressive surgery in older patients (>60 years old)

98 e did not improve functional recovery beyond decompressive surgery in patients with moderate-to-sever

99 nt enhancement for months to years following decompressive surgery is common.

100 tion/American Stroke Association guidelines, decompressive surgery is indicated in patients with cere

101 Trials indicate that for selected patients, decompressive surgery offers an advantage over nonoperat

102 Treatment was decompressive surgery or usual nonsurgical care.

103 Direct decompressive surgery plus postoperative radiotherapy is

104 elevant pathology consecutively referred for decompressive surgery to the National Hospital for Neuro

105 is and symptomatic cervical myelopathy after decompressive surgery using (18)F-FDG PET.

106 neoplastic or inflammatory myelopathies, and decompressive surgery was delayed by a median of 11 mont

107 s with acute thoracolumbar SCI who underwent decompressive surgery within five days of injury at part

108 nd activity limitation may be candidates for decompressive surgery.

109 ntestinal/colonic lengthening, and reductive/decompressive surgery.

110 in consideration of a potentially beneficial decompressive surgery.

111 c signs of spinal cord compression underwent decompressive surgery.

112 We assessed the efficacy of direct decompressive surgery.

113 will be of use in determining the effects of decompressive surgical treatment.