Tag: Survey

Posted on

What is the role of neurosurgeons in the current management of intracranial aneurysm in France?

Neurochirurgie 68 (2022) 16–20 

Study Design. – Retrospective observational survey-based study.

Introduction. – In France, intracranial aneurysm (IA) patients are managed by neurosurgeons and by interventional neuroradiologists. The growth of endovascular treatment led us to reflect on the role of neurosurgeons in the management of patients with IA. The present study aimed to highlight the current organization of IA management in France.

Method. – A 60-question survey was sent to the neurosurgeons in 34 hospitals managing IA patients. Thirty-three questions dealt with standards of care, follow-up procedures and the involvement of thespecific specialist.

Results. – Twenty-seven centers (79.4%) responded to the survey. A Vascular Multidisciplinary DiscussionTeam was organized, including both surgeons and neuroradiologists, in 92% of responding centers. There were department protocols in 66% of centers, a local registry in 33% and clinical trials in IA in 60%. Patients with unruptured IA were first seen by a neurosurgeon or by an interventional neuroradiologist, with different practices. For ruptured IA, the neurosurgeons were contacted first in 93% of cases, and were systematically involved in initial intensive care unit management. The patients were hospitalized in the neurosurgery department in 89% of the centers. The neurosurgeons took care of initial follow-up in 85%of the centers, and of lifetime follow-up in 36%. In most centers, radiological monitoring of IA was based on MRI angiography for patients who were embolized or under surveillance, and on CT angiography after microsurgery.

Conclusion. – Despite the growth of endovascular treatments, the present survey and the literature highlight a major role of neurosurgeons in treatment, follow-up and care coordination

Posted on

Cervical corpectomies: results of a survey and review of the literature on diagnosis, indications, and surgical technique

Anterior cervical discectomy versus corpectomy for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy

Acta Neurochir (2016) 158:1859–1867

Cervical corpectomy is an uncommon procedure and there are only limited data on the procedure’s indications, surgical approaches, and complications. The diagnosis, indications, surgical planning, and complications of cervical corpectomy were therefore surveyed to clarify the treatment strategies used by spinal surgeons in central Europe, with special attention to preoperative planning and decisionmaking for additional dorsal approaches in multilevel cases.

Materials and methods An online survey with 18 questions on the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative management of cervical corpectomies was conducted. The relevant specialist societies in Germany and Austria provided 1137 contacts for surgeons, and the responses were compared with recent literature reports.

Results In all, 302 surgeons (27 %) completed the survey, with wide variability in the treatment options offered. Most (51 %) perform fewer than five anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) procedures per year; 35 % do 5–20 per year. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) was preferred by 41 % of the participants to laminoplasty/ laminectomy (19 %/16 %) and ACCF (12 %). Most indications for ACCF involved degenerative (27 %), traumatic (17 %), and neoplastic (20 %) conditions. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were mainly associated with hardware failure. One-third of the surgeons tend to use an additional dorsal approach to increase the corpectomy construct’s stability for either two-level or three-level corpectomies.

Conclusions There is no current consensus in central Europe on the treatment of complex cervical disease and cervical corpectomy. The procedure is still rare, and the need for additional dorsal fixation is unclear. Further studies are needed in order to establish evidence-based standards for patient care.

Posted on

Current practice of external ventricular drainage: a survey among neurosurgical departments in Germany

A_Simple_Protocol_to_Prevent_External_Ventricular

Acta Neurochir (2016) 158:847–853

There are various recommendations, but no generally accepted guidelines, to reduce the risk of external ventricular drainage (EVD)-associated infections. The primary objective of the present study was to evaluate the current practice of EVD in a European country and to set the results in perspective to published data.

Method A standardised questionnaire prepared by the Commission of Technical Standards and Norms of the German Society of Neurosurgery was sent to 127 neurosurgical units in Germany.

Results Data were analysed from 99 out of 127 neurosurgical units which had been contacted. Overall, more than 10,000 EVD procedures appear to be performed in Germany annually. There is disagreement about the location where the EVD is inserted, and most EVDs are still inserted in the operation theatre. Most units apply subcutaneous tunnelling. Impregnated EVD catheters are used regularly in only about 20 % of units. Single-shot antibiotic prophylaxis is given in more than half of the units, while continued antibiotic prophylaxis is installed in only 15/99 units at a regular basis. There are discrepancies in the management of prolonged EVD use with regard to replacement policies. Regular cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) sampling is still performed widely. There were no statistical differences in policies with regard to academic versus non-academic units.

Conclusions This survey clearly shows that some newer recommendations drawn from published studies penetrate much slower into clinical routine, such as the use of impregnated catheters, for example. It remains unclear how different policies actually impact quality and outcome in daily routine.

Posted on

Management of lumbar spinal stenosis: a survey among Dutch spine surgeons

lumbar stenosis

Acta Neurochir (2014) 156:2139–2145

Various surgical and non-surgical treatments for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) are widely adopted in clinical practice, but high quality randomised controlled trials to support these are often lacking, especially in terms of their relative benefit and risk compared with other treatment options. Therefore, an evaluation of agreement among clinicians regarding the indications and the choice for particular treatments seems appropriate.

Methods One hundred and six Dutch neurosurgeons and orthopaedic spine surgeons completed a questionnaire, which evaluated treatment options for LSS and expectations regarding the effectiveness of surgical and non-surgical treatments.

Results Responders accounted for 6,971 decompression operations and 831 spinal fusion procedures for LSS annually. Typical neurogenic claudication, severe pain/disability, and a pronounced constriction of the spinal canal were considered the most important indications for surgical treatment by the majority of responders. Non-surgical treatment was generally regarded as ineffective and believed to be less effective than surgical treatment. Interlaminar decompression was the preferred technique by 68 % of neurosurgeons and 52 % orthopaedic surgeons for the treatment of LSS. Concomitant fusion was applied in 12% of all surgery for LSS. Most surgeons considered spondylolisthesis as an indication and spinal instability as a definite indication for additional fusion.

Conclusions The current survey demonstrates a wide variety of preferred treatments of symptomatic LSS by Dutch spine surgeons. To minimise variety, national and international protocols based on high-quality randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews are necessary to give surgeons more tools to support everyday decision-making.

Proudly powered by WordPress