ArticleCureus2026
Low-Velocity Penetrating Cranial Trauma With a Retained Axe: Surgical Management and Operative Challenges in a Civilian Assault Case.
Article in Cureus, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Penetrating brain injury (PBI) is a rare but potentially life-threatening form of traumatic brain injury characterized by violation of the skull and dura by a foreign object. Civilian penetrating head injuries caused by low-velocity objects such as knives, rods, or tools are uncommon and present unique diagnostic and surgical challenges. We report the case of a 23-year-old man who presented with a retained axe embedded in the right parietal region following an assault. On arrival, the patient was conscious with a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 15 but had left-sided hemiparesis. Non-contrast computed tomography (CT) of the head demonstrated a depressed right parietal fracture with a penetrating metallic foreign body extending intracranially. Emergency surgical exploration with controlled removal of the retained object, debridement of devitalized tissue, and dural repair was performed. The postoperative course was uneventful, and the patient was discharged on the tenth postoperative day with a healthy wound and stable neurological status, although residual hemiparesis persisted. At 15-day follow-up, no new neurological deficits were noted. This case highlights the importance of careful imaging evaluation, controlled extraction of penetrating objects along their trajectory, and meticulous dural repair. However, given the single-case nature and short follow-up, these findings should be interpreted with caution. In this patient, non-contrast CT was deemed sufficient as the trajectory was away from major intracranial vascular structures and no radiological indicators of vascular injury were identified.
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.