Study Design: Retrospective multicenter. Objectives: diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH) involving the cervical spine is a rare condition determining disabling aero-digestive symptoms. We analyzed impact of preoperative settings and intraoperative techniques on outcome of patients undergoing surgery for DISH. Methods: Patients with DISH needing for anterior cervical osteophytectomy were collected. Swallow studies and endoscopy supported imaging in targeting bone decompression. Patients characteristics, clinico-radiological presentation, outcome and surgical strategies were recorded. Impact on clinical outcome of duration and time to surgery and different surgical techniques was evaluated through ANOVA. Results: 24 patients underwent surgery. No correlation was noted between specific spinal levels affected by DISH and severity of pre-operative dysphagia. A trend toward a full clinical improvement was noted preferring the chisel ( P = 0.12) to the burr ( P = 0.65), and whenever C2-C3 was decompressed, whether hyperostosis included that level ( P = 0.15). Use of curved chisel reduced the surgical times ( P = 0.02) and, together with the nasogastric tube, the risk of complications, while bone removal involving 3 levels or more ( P = 0.04) and shorter waiting times for surgery ( P < 0.001) positively influenced a complete swallowing recovery. Early decompressions were preferred, resulting in 66.6% of patients reporting disappearance of symptoms within 7 days. One and two recurrences respectively at clinical and radiological follow-up were registered 18-30 months after surgery. Conclusion: The “age of DISH” counts more than patients’ age with timeliness of decompression being crucial in determining clinical outcome even with a preoperative mild dysphagia. Targeted bone resections could be reasonable in elderly patients, while in younger ones more extended decompressions should be preferred.
OBJECTIVEChronic subdural hematoma (CSDH) is one of the most common neurosurgical pathologies, typically affecting the elderly. Its incidence is expected to grow along with the aging population. Surgical drainage represents the treatment of choice; however, postoperative complications and the rate of recurrence are not negligible. For this reason, nonsurgical alternatives (such as middle meningeal artery embolization, steroids, or tranexamic acid administration) are gaining popularity worldwide and need to be carefully evaluated, especially in the elderly population.METHODSThe authors performed a systematic review according to PRISMA criteria of the studies analyzing the nonsurgical strategies for CSDHs. They collected all papers in the English language published between 1990 and 2019 by searching different medical databases. The chosen keywords were “chronic subdural hematoma,” “conservative treatment/management,” “pharmacological treatment,” “non-surgical,” “tranexamic acid,” “dexamethasone,” “corticosteroid,” “glucocorticoid,” “middle meningeal artery,” “endovascular treatment,” and “embolization.”RESULTSThe authors ultimately collected 15 articles regarding the pharmacological management of CSDHs matching the criteria, and 14 papers included the endovascular treatment.CONCLUSIONSThe results showed that surgery still represents the mainstay in cases of symptomatic patients with large CSDHs; however, adjuvant and alternative therapies can be effective and safe in a carefully selected population. Their inclusion in new guidelines is advisable.
BACKGROUND: Endovascular treatment of blister aneurysms is a promising approach, even though they are vascular lesions challenging to treat due to their angioarchitectural characteristics. PURPOSE: Our aim was to investigate clinical and radiologic outcomes after endovascular treatment of ruptured blister aneurysms.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.