ArticleAsian journal of neurosurgery2026
A Comparative Study of Watertight Dural Closure and Nonwatertight Dural Closure for Decompressive Craniectomy.
Article in Asian journal of neurosurgery, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Decompressive craniectomy (DC) remains a primary modality to effectively reduce elevated intracranial pressure (ICP), a correctly performed surgery can prevent cerebral complications and brain injuries caused due to refractory increased ICP. Aim: This article compares the safety and efficacy of two surgical techniques-watertight (WT) dural closure and nonwatertight (NWT) dural closure for DC. Materials and Methods: A prospective randomized comparative study was conducted from May 15, 2021 to April 15, 2022 in the neurosurgery department of a tertiary care hospital. Using the block randomization method, a total of 56 (28 patients per group: group WT including those undergoing WT dural closure and group NWT undergoing NWT dural closure) patients with indication for DC including traumatic brain injury, infarction, aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage, and dural venous sinus thrombosis were included. Results: Fifty-six randomly allocated patients were analyzed for operative characteristics and postoperative complications and for Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) outcomes. Compared with group WT, NWT had significantly lesser operative time. Both interventions were effective in managing the patients of traumatic brain injury. The mortality percentage was lesser in the NWT group. Despite fast surgery, the hospital stay in the NWT and WT groups were statistically similar. In the present study, GOS score was determined at 1, 2, and 3 months for determining the outcomes. GOS score improved significantly in both the groups. Statistically, the outcomes were comparable at 1 month ( Conclusion: NWT dural closure had significantly lesser operative time as compared with WT dural closure. However, amount of blood loss, hospital stay, complications, and mortality were similar among the two groups. Even the follow-up outcome response was comparable among the two groups. It can be concluded that in supratentorial craniotomies, adaptive NWT dural closure may be a good, safe, and time-saving alternative.
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.