Object Patients with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) only rarely need neurosurgical intervention; however, there is a subset of patients whose condition will deteriorate. Given the high resource utilization required for interhospital transfer and the relative infrequency of the need for intervention, this study was undertaken to determine how often patients who were transferred required intervention and if there were factors that could predict that need. Methods The authors performed a retrospective review of cases involving patients who were transferred to the University of New Mexico Level 1 trauma center for evaluation of mTBI between January 2005 and December 2009. Information including demographic data, lesion type, need for neurosurgical intervention, and short-term outcome was recorded. Results During the 4-year study period, 292 patients (age range newborn to 92 years) were transferred for evaluation of mTBI. Of these 292 patients, 182 (62.3%) had an acute traumatic finding of some kind; 110 (60.4%) of these had a follow-up CT to evaluate progression, whereas 60 (33.0%) did not require a follow-up CT. In 15 cases (5.1% overall), the patients were taken immediately to the operating room (either before or after the first CT). Only 4 patients (1.5% overall) had either clinical or radiographic deterioration requiring delayed surgical intervention after the second CT scan. Epidural hematoma (EDH) and subdural hematoma (SDH) were both found to be significantly associated with the need for surgery (OR 29.5 for EDH, 95% CI 6.6–131.8; OR 9.7 for SDH, 95% CI 2.4–39.1). There were no in-hospital deaths in the series, and 97% of patients were discharged with a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 15. Conclusions Most patients who are transferred with mTBI who need neurosurgical intervention have a surgical lesion initially. Only a very small percentage will have a delayed deterioration requiring surgery, with EDH and SDH being more concerning lesions. In most cases of mTBI, triage can be performed by a neurosurgeon and the patient can be observed without interhospital transfer.

Clinical presentation with cSDH is a sentinel event for patients aged 90 years or older; 67% have surgical intervention. Disposition does not vary with surgical or non-surgical treatment. Only 24% of patients of this age group presenting with cSDH return home despite a good admission GCS.

No abstract

Study Design. Prospective, multicenter, partially randomized. Objective. Assess rates of complications, revision surgery, and radiation between Mazor robotic-guidance (RG) and fluoroguidance (FG). Summary of Background Data. Minimally invasive surgery MIS ReFRESH is the first study designed to compare RG and FG techniques in adult minimally invasive surgery (MIS) lumbar fusions. Methods. Primary endpoints were analyzed at 1 year follow-up. Analysis of variables through Cox logistic regression and a Kaplan-Meier Survival Curve of surgical complications. Results. Nine sites enrolled 485 patients: 374 (RG arm) and 111 (FG arm). 93.2% of patients had more than 1 year f/u. There were no differences for sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, diabetes, or tumor. Mean age of RG patients was 59.0 versus 62.5 for FG (P ¼ 0.009) and body mass index (BMI) was 31.2 versus 28.1 (P< 0.001). Percentage of smokers was almost double in the RG (15.2% vs. 7.2%, P ¼ 0.029). Surgical time was similar (skin-toskin time/no. of screws) at 24.9 minutes RG and 22.9 FG (P ¼ 0.550). Fluoroscopy during surgery/no. of screws was 15.5 seconds RG versus 35.4 seconds FG, (15 seconds average reduction). Fluoroscopy time during instrumentation/no. of screws was 3.6 seconds RG versus 17.8 seconds FG showing an 80% average reduction of fluoro time/screw in RG (P < 0.001). Within 1 year follow-up, there were 39 (10.4%) surgical complications RG versus 39 (35.1%) FG, and 8 (2.1%) revisions RG versus 7 (6.3%) FG. Cox regression analysis including age, sex, BMI, CCI, and no. of screws, demonstrated that the hazard ratio (HR) for complication was 5.8 times higher FG versus RG (95% CI: 3.5-9.6, P < 0.001). HR for revision surgery was 11.0 times higher FG versus RG cases (95% CI 2.9-41.2, P < 0.001). Conclusion. Mazor robotic-guidance was found to have a 5.8 times lower risk of a surgical complication and 11.0 times lower risk for revision surgery. Surgical time was similar between groups and robotic-guidance reduced fluoro time per screw by 80% (approximately 1 min/case).

No abstract