ArticleJournal of Korean Neurosurgical Society2026
Decompressive Craniectomy for Intracranial Pathologies in the Intensive Care Unit : Effects on Mortality and Clinical Course.
Article in Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveDecompressive craniectomy (DC) is a surgical procedure in which a portion of the skull overlying edematous and vulnerable brain tissue is removed to reduce intracranial pressure. In cases where all other treatment modalities fail, DC can be life-saving. However, this procedure is not a "panacea;" it can prolong the death process and condemn the patient to a life in need of care, with severe neurological sequelae.
methodsThis multicenter, retrospective study recorded patients' comorbidities, Glasgow coma scale (GCS), Acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE II) and Sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) scores, as well as relevant laboratory parameters. Patients were categorized into three groups according to the Glasgow outcome scale.
resultsAmong 201 patients, 41.3% expired, 33.8% survived with severe vegetative sequelae, and 24.9% had mild to moderate sequelae. Non-survivors had significantly lower preoperative and postoperative GCS scores (median 7 vs. 9, p=0.010; 3 vs. 10, p<0.001) and higher 24-hour peak glucose levels (186 vs. 164 mg/dL, p=0.009). Steroid therapy was ineffective. Preoperative GCS scores were significantly lower in patients who later developed severe sequelae compared to those with better outcomes (median 8 vs. 11, p<0.001). Postoperative GCS scores were also lower in this group (8 vs. 13, p<0.001).Additionally, APACHE II (22 vs. 18, p=0.002) and SOFA scores (4 vs. 3, p<0.001) were higher, indicating greater disease severity.
conclusionDC can be a lifesaving procedure in selected patients with appropriate indications and appropriate timing. However, the possibility of this procedure resulting in high mortality and severe sequelae cannot be ignored. Therefore, the clinical outcomes that the patient and their families would find acceptable should be carefully considered.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.