ReviewSurgical neurology international2026
Reappraising the bifrontal decompressive craniectomy: A systematic literature review of indications, outcomes, and clinical applications.
Review in Surgical neurology international, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Bifrontal decompressive craniectomy (BDC) is used to manage elevated intracranial pressure (ICP) from bilateral frontal swelling caused by severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), malignant cerebral edema, or other acute intracranial pathologies, but conflicting outcome data have been reported. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of BDC across various etiologies, identify gaps to guide research, and outline a framework for clinical decision-making. Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane databases was conducted. In addition, 3 formalin-fixed, noninjected cadaveric head specimens were dissected to illustrate BDC and its anatomical correlates. Results: Of 410 articles, 54 met inclusion criteria (742 patients). TBI was the leading etiology (656 of 742 patients; 88.4%), notably from motor vehicle collisions (58.4%) and falls (19.7%). On initial examination, 315 of 519 patients (60.7%) had a Glasgow Coma Scale score ≤8. Mean (standard deviation) time from injury to BDC was 2.5 (1.9) days, intensive care unit stay was 12.9 (5.0) days, hospital stay was 66.7 (38.9) days, and time to cranioplasty was 83.4 (40.7) days. Glasgow Outcome Scale values were reported for 494 patients: 205 patients, 5; 75 patients, 4; 71 patients, 3; 24 patients, 2; and 119 patients, 1. Conclusion: BDC may offer a survival benefit in patients with otherwise-fatal elevations in ICP, but cases require more detailed tracking. Functional outcomes vary, and the risks of developing severe disability are substantial. Implementing BDC in acute neurocritical care requires ethically grounded patient selection and family counseling, incorporating prognosis, patient values, and shared decision-making.
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.