Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31372915›Full record

ArticleNeurosurgical review2020

Sinking flap syndrome revisited: the who, when and why.

Alessandro Di Rienzo, Roberto Colasanti, Maurizio Gladi, Angelo Pompucci, Martina Della Costanza, Riccardo Paracino, Domenic Esposito, Maurizio Iacoangeli

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neurosurgical review, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Alessandro Di RienzoDepartment of Neurosurgery, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Conca 71, 60126, Ancona, Italy.
Roberto ColasantiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Conca 71, 60126, Ancona, Italy. roberto.colasanti@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5026-8089
Maurizio GladiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Conca 71, 60126, Ancona, Italy.
Angelo PompucciDepartment of Neurosurgery, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Martina Della CostanzaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Conca 71, 60126, Ancona, Italy.
Riccardo ParacinoDepartment of Neurosurgery, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Conca 71, 60126, Ancona, Italy.
Domenic EspositoDepartment of Neurosurgery, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Conca 71, 60126, Ancona, Italy.
Maurizio IacoangeliDepartment of Neurosurgery, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Via Conca 71, 60126, Ancona, Italy.
Marche Polytechnic University · ITUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The sinking flap syndrome (SFS) is one of the complications of decompressive craniectomy (DC). Although frequently presenting with aspecific symptoms, that may be underestimated, it can lead to severe and progressive neurological deterioration and, if left untreated, even to death. We report our experience in a consecutive series of 43 patients diagnosed with SFS and propose a classification based on the possible etiopathogenetic mechanisms. In 10 years' time, 43 patients presenting with severely introflexed decompressive skin flaps plus radiological and clinical evidence of SFS were identified. We analysed potential factors involved in SFS development (demographics, time from decompression to deterioration, type, size and cause leading to DC, timing of cranioplasty, CSF dynamics disturbances, clinical presentation). Based on the collected data, we elaborated a classification system identifying 3 main SFS subtypes: (1) primary or atrophic, (2) secondary or hydrocephalic and (3) mixed. Very large DC, extensive brain damage, medial craniectomy border distance from the midline < 2 cm, re-surgery for craniectomy widening and CSF circulation derangements were found to be statistically associated with SFS. Cranioplasty led to permanent neurological improvement in 37 cases. In our series, SFS incidence was 16%, significantly larger than what is reported in the literature. Its management was more complex in patients affected by CSF circulation disturbances (especially when needing the removal of a contralateral infected cranioplasty or a resorbed bone flap). Although cranioplasty was always the winning solution, its appropriate timing was strategical and, if needed, we performed it even in an emergency, to ensure patient's improvement.

Indexed as

Plastic Surgery ProceduresAdolescentAdultAgedCraniofacial AbnormalitiesDecompressive CraniectomyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient SelectionPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesSurgical FlapsSyndromeYoung AdultCranioplastyDecompressive craniectomyHydrocephalusParadoxical herniationSinking flap syndromeSyndrome of the trephined

Identifiers

PMID31372915
OpenAlexW2966342267

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.