Dataset Information

Prophylactic use of dural tenting sutures in elective craniotomies in adults-is it necessary? A study protocol for a multicentre, investigator- and participant-blinded randomised, parallel-group, non-inferiority trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In the early days of neurosurgery, extradural haemorrhages (EDHs) contributed to a high mortality rate after craniotomies. Almost a century ago, Walter Dandy reported dural tenting sutures as an effective way to prevent postoperative EDH. Over time, his technique gained in popularity and significance to finally become a neurosurgical standard. Yet, several retrospective reports and one prospective report have questioned the ongoing need for dural tenting sutures. Dandy's explanation that the haemostasis observed under hypotensive conditions is deceiving and eventually causes EDH may be obsolete. Today, proper intra- and postoperative care, including maintenance of normovolemia and normotension and the use of modern haemostatic agents, may be sufficient for effective haemostasis. Thus, there is a fundamental need to evaluate the necessity of dural tenting sutures in a solid, unbiased, evidence-based manner.

Methods

This study is designed as a randomised, multicentre, double-blinded, controlled interventional trial with 1:1 allocation. About one half of the participants will undergo craniotomy without dural tenting sutures and will be considered an intervention group. The other half will undergo craniotomy with these sutures. Both groups will be followed clinically and radiologically. The primary outcome is reoperation due to extradural haematoma. Secondary outcomes aim to evaluate the impact of dural tenting sutures on mortality, readmission risk, postoperative headaches, size of extradural collection, cerebrospinal fluid leak risk and the presence of any new neurological deficit. The study protocol follows the SPIRIT 2013 statement.

Discussion

It is possible that many neurosurgeons around the globe are tenting the dura in elective craniotomies which brings no benefit and only extends the operation. Unfortunately, there is not enough data to support or reject this technique in modern neurosurgery. This is the first study that may produce strong, evidence-based recommendations on using dural tenting sutures.

Trial registration, ethics and dissemination

The Bioethics Committee of the Medical University of Warsaw approved the study protocol (KB/106/2018). The trial is registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT03658941 ) on September 6, 2018. The findings of this trial will be submitted to a peer-reviewed neurosurgical journal. Abstracts will be submitted to relevant national and international conferences.

Trial status

Protocol version and date: version 1.5, 14.01.2020 First recruitment: September 7, 2018 Estimated recruitment completion: September 1, 2021.

SUBMITTER: Kunert P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8042961 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimsWe explored the experiences and motivations of participants and staff who took part in the TRED-HF trial (Therapy withdrawal in REcovered Dilated cardiomyopathy).Methods and resultsWe conducted a qualitative study, using semi-structured interviews, with participants (n = 12) and the research team (n = 4) from the TRED-HF trial. Interviews were carried out in 2019 and were audio-recorded and transcribed. Data were managed using NVivo and analysed using framework analysis. A patient representative provided guidance on the interpretation of findings and presentation of themes to ensure these remained meaningful, and an accurate representation, to those living with dilated cardiomyopathy. Three key themes emerged from the data: (i) perception of health; (ii) experiences and relationships with healthcare services and researchers; and (iii) perception of risk. Study participants held differing perceptions of their health; some did not consider themselves to have a heart condition or disagreed with the medical term 'heart failure'. Relationships between participants, research staff, and clinical management teams influenced participants' experiences and decision making during the trial, including following clinical advice. There were differences in participants' perceptions of risk and their decisions to take heart failure medication after the trial was completed. Although the original TRED-HF trial did not provide the results many had hoped for, a strong motivator for taking part was the opportunity to withdraw medication in a safely monitored environment which had been previously considered by some participants before. Investigators acknowledged that the insights gained from the study can now be used to support evidence-based conversations with patients.ConclusionsFor people whose dilated cardiomyopathy is in remission, decisions to continue, reduce, or stop their medication are influenced by perceptions of personal health, perceive risk and the important of work, employment, recreation, relationships, and long-term plans. The unique relationship between patient and cardiologist provides opportunities to promote honest discussion about adherence to medication and personalized long-term management.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate patient satisfaction and associated predictors at discharge, as well as patient experience at 30-day follow-up, in a neurosurgical enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programme.DesignA single-centre, prospective, randomised controlled study.SettingA tertiary hospital in China.ParticipantsA total of 140 neurosurgical patients aged 18-65 years old who had a single intracranial lesion and were admitted for elective craniotomy between October 2016 and July 2017 were included.InterventionsPatients were randomised into two groups: 70 patients received care according to a novel neurosurgical ERAS protocol (ERAS group) and 70 patients received conventional perioperative care (control group).Outcome measuresPatient satisfaction at discharge was evaluated using a multimodal questionnaire. A secondary analysis of patient experience regarding participation in the ERAS programme was conducted using a semistructured qualitative interview via telephone at 30-day follow-up.ResultsThe mean patient satisfaction was significantly higher in the ERAS group than in the control group at discharge (92.2±4.3 vs 86.8±7.4, p=0.0001). The most important predictors of patient satisfaction included age (OR=6.934), postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score (OR=0.184), absorbable skin suture (OR=0.007) and postoperative length of stay (LOS) (OR=0.765). Analysis on patient experience revealed five themes: information transfer, professional support, shared responsibility and active participation, readiness for discharge, and follow-up, all of which are closely related and represent positive and negative aspects.ConclusionsMeasures that include decreasing PONV VAS score, incorporating absorbable skin suture and shortening LOS seem to increase patient satisfaction in a neurosurgical ERAS programme. Analysis of data on patient experience highlights several aspects to achieve patient-centred and high-quality care. Further studies are warranted to standardise the assessment of patient satisfaction and experience in planning, employing and appraising the ERAS programme.Trial registration numberChiCTR-INR-16009662.