preprint
<title>Abstract</title> Background Decompressive craniectomy (DC) is commonly performed to control refractory intracranial hypertension after traumatic brain injury (TBI). This study aimed to identify the clinical, radiological, and perioperative factors associated with functional outcomes following DC among patients with TBI treated at tertiary hospitals in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Methods A prospective multicenter cohort study was conducted among consecutive patients with TBI who underwent decompressive craniectomy at four teaching hospitals affiliated with the Addis Ababa University. Sociodemographic, clinical, radiological, intraoperative, and postoperative data were collected. Functional outcomes were assessed using the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (EGOS) at discharge, 3, and 6 months. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the factors associated with poor outcomes. Results A total of 94 patients were included (mean age 38.9 ± 15 years), with a predominance of male patients (88.3%). Road traffic accidents were the leading cause of injury (54.3%). At 6 months, mortality was 33%, whereas 59.6% of patients achieved a favorable functional outcome (EGOS 5–8). On multivariable analysis, admission Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) independently predicted poor outcomes. Compared with patients with GCS 13–15, those with GCS < 5 (adjusted OR 8.07; 95% CI 2.25–23.7) and GCS 5–8 (adjusted OR 27.06; 95% CI 3.92–29.83) had significantly higher odds of poor outcomes (likelihood ratio test, p = 0.001). In addition, surgery performed 24–72 h after injury was independently associated with poor outcomes compared with surgery within 24 h (adjusted OR 5.98; 95% CI 1.47–30.38; p = 0.02). Conclusion Decompressive craniectomy provides acceptable survival and functional outcomes in patients with traumatic brain injury in resource-limited settings. Admission GCS and timing of surgical intervention were the most important independent predictors of outcome.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8802278/v1
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.