Next Article in Journal
Pediatric Optic Neuritis: Description of Four Cases and Review of the Literature
Previous Article in Journal
Comparison of Recurrence and Complication Rates Following Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair among Preterm versus Full-Term Newborns: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Children
Volume 8
Issue 10
10.3390/children8100854
children-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Management and Outcome of Traumatic Intracerebral Hemorrhage in 79 Infants and Children from a Single Level 1 Trauma Center

by
Harald Binder
1,
Marek Majdan
2,
Johannes Leitgeb
1,2,
Stephan Payr
1,
Robert Breuer
1,
Stefan Hajdu
1 and
Thomas M. Tiefenboeck
1,*
1
Department of Trauma Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria
2
Institute for Global Health and Epidemiology, Department of Public Health, Trnava University, 91701 Trnava, Slovakia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Children 2021, 8(10), 854; https://doi.org/10.3390/children8100854
Submission received: 11 September 2021 / Revised: 20 September 2021 / Accepted: 21 September 2021 / Published: 26 September 2021
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Objective: Traumatic brain injury is a leading form of pediatric trauma and a frequent cause of mortality and acquired neurological impairment in children. The aim of this study was to present the severity and outcomes of traumatic intracerebral bleeding in children and adolescence. Methods: Seventy-nine infants and children with intracerebral bleedings were treated between 1992 and 2020 at a single level 1 trauma center. Data regarding accident, treatment and outcomes were collected retrospectively. The Glasgow Outcome Scale was used to classify the outcome at hospital discharge and at follow-up visits. CT scans of the brain were classified according to the Rotterdam score. Results: In total, 41 (52%) patients with intracerebral bleedings were treated surgically, and 38 (48%) patients were treated conservatively; in 15% of the included patients, delayed surgery was necessary. Patients presenting multiple trauma (p < 0.04), higher ISS (p < 0.01), poor initial neurological status (p < 0.001) and a higher Rotterdamscore (p = 0.038) were significantly more often treated surgically. Eighty-three percent of patients were able to leave the hospital, and out of these patients, about 60% showed good recovery at the latest follow-up visit. Overall, 11 patients (14%) died. Conclusion: The findings in this study verified intracerebral bleeding as a rare but serious condition. Patients presenting with multiple traumas, higher initial ISS, poor initial neurological status and a higher Rotterdamscore were more likely treated by surgery. Trial registration: (researchregistry 2686).

1. Introduction

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a leading form of pediatric trauma and a common cause of mortality and acquired neurological impairment in children [1]. Acute intracerebral bleedings (ICBs) in children, especially in infants and toddlers, are relatively uncommon, with a reported incidence of 1.4 cases per 100,000 children [2,3]. Despite this fact, it seems that pediatric TBI is rarely investigated, and physicians are often left to rely on their clinical experience when making treatment decisions [4]. Due to its rare and atypical occurrence [2,3], pediatric intracerebral bleeding (ICB) poses a significant challenge for diagnosis and treatment. Furthermore, it is not directly comparable to adult ICBs, which are occurring in up to 8.2% of all traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) [5] and 13 to 35% of severe TBIs [6,7,8]. ICBs in children and adolescent are often associated with brain tumors, congenital heart disease and/ or vascular lesions. Overall, the most common cause of ICB in children representing the highest morbidity and mortality is trauma [9,10]. Early recognition of ICB is a crucial due to the danger of delayed development, cerebral palsy, epilepsy and even death. Mental status changes, headaches, convulsions, focal neurological deficits and vomiting are typical clinical signs of these patients [9]. In 2014, a meta-analysis investigating the association of particular symptoms relative to ICB in pediatric patients with minor head trauma presented that skull fractures, focal neurological deficit, seizure and a Glasgow coma scale (GCS) < 15 significantly correlated with ICB. Prior to this, Hamilton et al. [11] showed a very low incidence of ICB in pediatric patients with minor head trauma and a GCS of 15 emphasizing that the GCS is still an important tool.
The outcome after traumatic intracranial bleeding depends on different factors such as size and localization of the hemorrhage as well as the clinical status at time of presentation. Furthermore, it is associated with a mortality rate of 7%, which is very similar to the mortality of acute epidural hematoma [2,6] and considerably more favorable than traumatic subdural hematoma, especially when associated with child abuse [12].
Another group of researchers presented a correlation between neuromarkers and GOS scores for brain-derived neurotrophic factors and autoantibodies relative to S100 in severe brain injuries in children [13].
Due to the development of diagnostic methods in the last decades, computed tomography (CT) has become a standard device for the prompt and accurate detection of ICB [5,6,7,8].
The treatment of ICBs depends on the amount of bleeding and neurological symptoms at the time of admission. Nevertheless, the influence of different invasive procedures such as immediate surgery (decompressive craniectomy or a craniotomy) and intracranial pressure (ICP) catheter monitoring and brain tissue oxygenation pressure (PtiO2) upon the final outcome is uncertain [14,15,16].
However, variations in outcome and management make it difficult to clarify aspects affecting the clinical presentation of traumatic ICB in children and infants [5,6,7,8].
The aim of this study was to present the severity and outcome of traumatic ICB in children admitted to a level 1 trauma center and to analyze differences between surgical and conservative treatment.
The hypothesis in this retrospective study is that an adequate treatment of ICBs in children and adolescence may result in good clinical and functional outcomes.

2. Methods

2.1. Data Collection

This study was performed as a retrospective study including all patients (<16 years) admitted with TBI to a level 1 trauma center (blinded for review) between 1992 and 2020.
The following data were extracted out of patients’ charts: (1) patients demographics (age, sex); (2) cause of injury; (3) injury severity (Injury Severity Score (ISS), (4) Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and additional injuries); (5) CT findings; (6) treatment modalities (surgical vs. conservative, types of surgery and additional treatment); and (7) outcomes (Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS)) at discharge and at follow up.

2.2. Treatment Procedures

A rapid examination by an emergency physician, which included the documentation of pediatric GCS and pupillary reactivity, was performed in all admitted patients. The preliminary measures are followed by emergency medical treatment and included rapid-sequence intubation, ventilation, treatment of hemorrhage, treatment of associated substantial extra cranial injury and fluid resuscitation if necessary.
After admission to the hospital, each patient underwent an immediate CT scan and an examination by a trauma team (consisting of anesthesiologists, trauma surgeons and/or neurosurgeons, radiologists and nurses). Depending on the results of the CT scan, patients underwent surgery and/or were admitted to the ICU or pediatric ward for conservative treatment. The conservative management was in accordance to the guidelines for the management of pediatric severe traumatic brain injury [17] and the S2k guidelines AWMF [18]. The main goal is to reduce the ICP by hyperventilation, osmolar therapy (e.g., Mannitol) and 30 degrees of upper body elevation. Additionally, antibiotics in patients with skull fractures and an anticonvulsive treatment in all patients were initiated.
Surgical treatment was performed by trauma surgeons and neurosurgery in consultation with neurosurgeons for complex cases. Intensive medical treatment has been implemented by anesthesiologists in cooperation with trauma surgeons and neurosurgeons.
The documentations of pre-hospital parameters and treatments were conducted by paramedics. CT scan findings were interpreted by trauma surgeons as well as neurosurgeons in collaboration with radiologists specialized in trauma diagnostics. In all patients with bleeding, the Rotterdam Score was calculated [19]. Data regarding the duration of various treatments, complications and outcomes were collected at hospital discharge and at follow up.
The follow-up protocol after TBI with bleeding conservatively managed includes: IMC stay or admission to the pediatric ward and routine clinical investigations for the first 24 h including monitoring and a neurological evaluation every two to four hours. During the following days, if no neurologic impairment appears, the monitoring process was concluded, and the clinical investigation is extended to every six to eight hours. Follow-up CT scans in conservatively managed patients are only performed by neurologic impairment.
The follow-up protocol after TBI with bleeding operatively managed includes: ICU stay for at least 48 h and a treatment according to the guidelines for the management of pediatric severe traumatic brain injury [17]. A follow-up CT scan was routinely performed in the first 48 h after surgery.
After hospital discharge, the patients were asked to attend follow up visits 2 weeks after discharge and then every half year for the first year. Further follow-up visits were planned in accordance to the symptoms presented.

2.3. Data Analysis

The aim of this study was to present characteristics and outcomes in surgically and conservatively treated patients after ICB. Affected patients who underwent at least one cranial surgery during their hospital stay were assigned to the “operated” group; if not, they were assigned to the “conservative” group. Comparisons of demographic factors, injury causes, trauma characteristics, severity and outcome were made between both groups. In the case of continuous variables, medians with respective interquartile ranges were calculated and used as central measures. In the case of categorical variables, the total values with corresponding percentages were calculated as measures of frequency. In order to estimate the population proportions, 95% confidence intervals were calculated wherever percentages were used. All analyses were performed by using the R project statistical environment. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

3. Results

Overall, 79 patients were included with the diagnosis.
Demographic factors and injury causes are presented in Table 1. The median age of the patients was 8 years (10 years in the operated and 8.5 years in the conservative group); the male sex was somewhat more prevalent in the “surgically treated” group (66%) and slightly higher in the “conservatively treated” group (55%). The following major causes of injury with respect to their frequency were identified: traffic accidents, falls from over 150 cm height followed by falls from 50 to 150 cm height and sporting accidents. Falls from heights lower than 50 cm as well as children with battered child syndrome were evenly distributed. Falls from over 150 cm were more prevalent in the operated group. Neither acute nor delayed surgical intervention was necessary in the group of falls from less than 50 cm. The distributions concerning falls from 50 to 150 cm were quite similar in all treatment groups (with two patients (5%) in the “conservative group” and one patient (3%) in the “operative group” as well as one patient (8%) in the “delayed surgery group”) (Table 1). An increasing number of high impact traumas with increasing age could be detected, therefore suggesting an association (Table 1 and Table 2). Symptoms including external swellings within the head region (49%), vomiting (15%), impaired consciousness (28%) and severe neurological deficits including coma (51%) are shown in Table 2. In all patients who underwent a surgical procedure, a pathologic neurological status was present, underlining the severity of these traumatic lesions.
Table 2 also presents injury severity patterns. All operated patients had additional severe injuries. Seventy-nine percent of patients were comatose and their ISS was significantly higher (p < 0.01) compared to the conservatively treated group (medians of 25 vs. 16). Fifty-nine percent of the patients in the “operated” group had a Rotterdam CT score of four or higher. In the “conservative” group, a score of ≥4 could be observed in 21%. CT findings (presence of additional diagnoses, midline shift and compression of basal cisterns) are shown in Figure 1, suggesting more severe injuries in the operative group. Treatment factors are shown in Table 3.
Surgically treated patients showed a higher prevalence (59%) of air transport, and they were significantly more often intubated in the field (79% vs. 32%, p < 0.001) and spent also a significantly longer period of time in the intensive care unit (ICU) (21% of the operated group stayed longer than 30 days vs. 5% in the conservative group, p < 0.001), emphasizing the severity of traumatic lesions in this group (Table 3). Twenty-three patients (76%) were operated within 1 h after admission, seven patients (24%) underwent two surgical interventions, two patients (7%) had three surgical procedures and one patient (3%) even had four surgical interventions (Table 4). Delayed surgery of ICB was performed on patients with other life-threatening injuries (Table 2) or when conservative management had failed (Table 4). Intracranial pressure (ICP) was monitored in 83% of patients (Table 4). ICP monitoring was removed according to protocol when ICP parameters showed no value > 10 mmHg in 24 h in order to minimize the risk of postoperative infections.
The GOS at hospital discharge showed a significant difference (p < 0.001) between the two groups; however, at the latest follow up (mean 12 months; median 6 months), this difference was no longer present (Table 5). The majority of the patients presented favorable outcomes (moderate disability or good recovery) both at discharge (57 patients; 73%) and at follow up (46 patients; 58%). The proportion of unfavorable outcomes (death, vegetative state and severe disability) was higher in the operative group, especially upon hospital discharge. There was a significant difference (p < 0.001) concerning the time of death between the conservatively and surgically treated groups. In the surgically treated group, six patients (20%) died, three (10%) within 24 h and two (7%) within 48 h. Fourteen days after delayed surgery, one patient (8%) died due to cardiovascular failure. Another patient (3%) died 21 days after the surgical procedure due to multiorgan failure after sepsis. In the conservatively treated group, three patients (8%) died within 24 h and one (3%) after 48 h past hospital admission. The overall mortality rate of ICBs in infants and children in the sample was 14%.
In 46 patients (58%), educational achievements could be evaluated at the latest follow-up visit showing that academic performances were hardly affected. Patients who underwent surgery tended to have more unfavorable outcomes with respect to their neurocognitive functions.

4. Discussion

This study analyzed the demographic factors, injury severity, treatment and outcomes of 79 cases of pediatric TBI with acute ICB. This study focused on traumatic ICB by comparing surgically and conservatively treated patients. In the current literature, most studies only analyze spontaneous ICB [20,21,22,23]. Studies concerning traumatic etiology such as the Kang et al. [24] or Mandera et al. series [5] are rather rare.
Low GCS scores, high ISS, unfavorable CT findings such as a midline shift of more than 5 mm, compressed or closed basal cisterns or cerebral oedema and neurological deficits were treated rather operatively. These findings did not match the results of Kang et al. [24], presenting a higher incidence of conservative treatment (71%) in their study, whereas Meyer-Heim and Boltshausers reported that 32% of their patients were treated conservatively and 68% were treated surgically [20]. Although there is a difference concerning selection criteria in both studies, Meyer-Heim and Boltshauser et al. [20] included spontaneous ICB, whereas Kang et al. [24] focused on traumatic etiology; still, the above described criteria such as low GCS scores and unfavorable CT findings are applicable in both studies.
Overall, 41 patients (52%) achieved good recovery at the final follow up (Table 5), showing similar findings to Ruf et al. [25]. Mahanna et al. proclaimed no surgical impact on the survival of patients with TBI, but a considerable change concerning neurological progression was reported [26]. These findings did not match with the present study showing a less favorable outcome in the operatively treated group (Table 5). The majority of pediatric series evaluating the benefit of surgical intervention after TBI agree on early surgery (within 48 h after the trauma) [27,28,29]. Delayed surgery was necessary in 15% of our patient collective. As presented in literature, it is of essential importance to treat such patients in order to avoid further damage to the brain [30]. In addition, an increase in different blood parameters may be an early sign of diffuse axonal injury after traumatic brain injury [31].
Moreover, different predictive parameters are presented in the literature, and there are still controversies with respect to the application of surgery or conservative treatment in pediatric ICB [32,33,34]. Another aspect could potentially help such decisions: While in adult head-trauma patients, secondary risk factors influence the outcome significantly [32], such an effect is less apparent in children [4], which is also supported by this study. Furthermore, the combination of higher plasticity and deformity, whereby external forces are absorbed in a different manner compared to adults, should be considered. For example, the lower rigidity of the infant skull as well as open sutures function as joints, allowing a small degree of movement in response to a mechanical stress [35].
In our study, CT findings (midline shift and patency of basal cisterns), GCS score and presence of neurological defects were reliable indicators for surgical treatment. As above mentioned, the percentage of unfavorable outcome (death, vegetative state and severe disability) was higher in the operative group. Caroli et al. [36] and Lobato et al. [37] described unfavorable outcomes in cases with ICB associated with SDH, especially in operatively treated patients. This corresponds with our data. In the present study, SDH was detected in 45% of operated patients and 24% in the conservative group. Furthermore, 35% of operatively treated SAH vs. 13% conservatively treated could be detected. Epidural hematoma (EDH) was shown in 41% of our operated patients and in 13% of the conservatively treated patients. In the operated group, a hygroma could be detected in 10% of the patients (Figure 1). Therefore, these results are assumed to be negative prognostic factors concerning the survival and also according to Bullock et al. [38]. The trend to manage patients with combined lesions conservatively is shown in Figure 1.
Patients without neurological symptoms, midline-shift less than 5 mm and open basal cisterns may be managed conservatively, showing good neurological outcomes. This is in accordance with the findings in other similar cohorts [4,38]. The hospital mortality of 14% in this study is well in line with the published literature [39,40,41,42,43]. Pulmonary failure and multiorgan failure due to sepsis were reasons for death in two operated polytraumatized children. Multiple injured patients, multiorgan failure due to sepsis and cerebral herniation syndrome were the reasons for death. Diffuse cerebral swelling on initial cranial CT imaging combined with an infaust massive cerebral hemorrhage was the reason for palliative non-surgical treatment in two cases (5%) of acute brain death. Both head injuries were due to child abuse. While subdural hematoma is observed as one of the most common manifestations of abused children [2,44,45,46,47,48], often in combination with subarachnoid hemorrhage (49), ICB is rather rare, probably due to the more elastic vessels. They also tend not to tear as readily than compared to adjacent axons on tissue deformation [48]. This is also confirmed by this present study where only two cases (3%) could be detected. All of them were under the age of 6 years and conservatively managed. Although only 3% of our patients suffered from ICB due to child abuse, the absence of a history of significant accidental trauma mandates a full investigation of maltreatment, which is also recommended in the literature [49]. The above-mentioned higher plasticities and deformity as well as the substantially lower secondary risk factors compared to adults could be the causes for the rarity of this pathology in children when taken together. To summarize, negative prognostic factors for survival include surgically treated ICB combined with additional intracranial lesions (Figure 1), the presence of a polytrauma and diffuse swelling as a potent precursor of cerebral herniation. Although it is very infrequent and, therefore, rare, ICBs resulting from child abuse can also be observed as negative prognostic factors.
There are limitations to this study: It has a retrospective design and a relatively small cohort of patients, which is a consequence of the rather rare occurrence of these specific types of traumas, but nevertheless it limits the generalizability of the findings. There were no homogenous guidelines for treatment in the analyzed center, and treatment decisions were made by the surgeon. However, our study represents a homogenous group and covers the main outcome parameters for a valid conclusion.
Conclusion: Our study confirms that pediatric ICB is a rare but serious condition. In defiance of an overall mortality rate of 14%, 60% of the surviving patients showed no neurological impairment at the latest follow up. Patients presenting with multiple traumas, higher initial ISS, poor initial neurological status and a higher Rotterdamscore were more likely treated by surgery.
Figure legend: Figure 1 represents differences in conservative versus surgical treatment regarding diagnosis, midline shift and compression of the basal cisterns in relation to patient number in percentages. Figure 2 shows a detailed overview of intracranial pressure (in millimeter of mercury) measured at time of surgery.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: H.B., J.L., R.B., S.H. and T.M.T.; Data curation: H.B., M.M., S.P. and R.B.; Formal analysis: H.B., M.M., S.P. and T.M.T.; Investigation: J.L.; Methodology: H.B. and T.M.T.; Project administration: H.B. and T.M.T.; Software: M.M.; Supervision: S.H. and T.M.T.; Visualization: M.M.; Writing original draft: H.B. and T.M.T.; Writing review & editing: M.M., J.L., S.P., R.B., S.H. and T.M.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

There was no funding regarding this manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Ethics approval was obtained prior to study initiation. The corresponding ethics review board of the Medical University of Vienna, Borschkegasse 8b/6, 1090 Vienna, EK Nr1111/2014 approved the study.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Abbreviations

AISAbbreviated Injury Scale
CAChild Abuse
CTComputed Tomography
EDHEpidural Hematoma
SDHSubdural Hematoma
GCSGlasgow Coma Scale
ICPIntracranial Pressure
ICUIntermediate Care Unit
ISSInjury Severity Score
ICBIntracerebral Bleeding
TBITraumatic Brain Injury

STROBE Guidelines

To be used by authors of all observational clinical studies published in OTSR. For this purpose, a cohort study (the term used by STROBE) is considered a longitudinal study typically reporting outcomes of treatment in one or more cohorts; a case-control study is one that identifies the factors in outcomes; a cross-sectional study is one that identifies the prevalence of factors or characteristics in a population at a single point in time.
This checklist table is modified from The STROBE Initiative, www.strobe-statement.org, access date 15 January 2021 and should be filled and submitted within the electronic submission.
Item NoRecommendationPlease Insert Check Where Included or N/A Where Not Applicable
Title and abstract1(a) Indicate the study’s design with a commonly used term in the title or the abstractcheck
(b) Provide, in the abstract, an informative and balanced summary of what was performed and what was foundcheck
Introduction
Background/rationale2Explain the scientific background and rationale for the investigation being reportedcheck
Objectives3State specific objectives, including any pre specified hypothesescheck
Methods
Study design4Present key elements of study design early in the papercheck
Setting5Describe the setting, locations and relevant dates, including periods of recruitment, treatment, follow up and data collectioncheck
Participants6(a) Cohort study—Provide the eligibility criteria and the sources and methods of selection of participants. Describe methods of follow up
Case-control study—Provide the eligibility criteria and the sources and methods of case ascertainment and control selection. Provide the rationale for the choice of cases and controls
Cross-sectional study—Provide the eligibility criteria and the sources and methods of selection of participants		check
(b) Cohort study—For matched studies, provide matching criteria and number of treated and untreated
Case-control study—For matched studies, provide matching criteria and the number of controls per case
Variables7Clearly define all outcomes, exposures, predictors, potential confounders and effect modifiers. Provide diagnostic criteria, if applicablecheck
Data sources/measurement8 *For each variable of interest, provide sources of data and details of methods of assessment (measurement) Describe comparability of assessment methods if there is more than one groupcheck
Bias9Describe any efforts to address potential sources of biascheck
Study size10Explain how the study size was arrived atcheck
Quantitative variables11Explain how quantitative variables were handled in the analyses. If applicable, describe which groupings were chosen and whycheck
Statistical methods12(a) Describe all statistical methods, including those used to control for confounding factorscheck
/(b) Describe any methods used to examine subgroups and interactions/
/(c) Explain how missing data were addressedcheck
/(d) If applicable, explain how loss to follow up was addressedcheck
/(e) Describe any sensitivity analyses/
Results
Participants13 *(a) Report numbers of individuals at each stage of study—e.g., numbers potentially eligible, examined for eligibility, confirmed eligible, included in the study, completing follow up and analyzedcheck
/(b) Give reasons for nonparticipation at each stagecheck
Descriptive data14 *(a) Give characteristics of study participants (e.g., demographic, clinical, social) and information on other treatments and potential confounderscheck
/(b) Indicate number of participants with missing data for each variable of interestcheck
/(c) Cohort study—Summarize follow-up time (e.g., average and total amount)check
Outcome data15 *Report numbers of outcome events or summary measures over timeN/A
Main results16(a) Provide unadjusted estimates and, if applicable, confounder-adjusted estimates and their precision (e.g., 95% confidence interval). Make clear which confounders were adjusted for and why they were included/
/(b) Report category boundaries when continuous variables were categorizedN/A
/(c) If relevant, consider translating estimates of relative risk into absolute risk for a meaningful time periodN/A
Other analyses17Report other analyses performed—e.g., analyses of subgroups and interactions and sensitivity analysesN/A
Discussion
Key results18Summarise key results with reference to study objectivescheck
Limitations19Discuss limitations of the study, taking into account sources of potential bias or imprecision. Discuss both direction and magnitude of any potential biascheck
Interpretation20Provide a cautious overall interpretation of results considering objectives, limitations, multiplicity of analyses, results from similar studies and other relevant evidencecheck
Generalisability21Discuss the generalisability (external validity) of the study resultscheck
Other information
Funding22Provide the source of funding and the role of the funders for the present study and, if applicable, for the original study on which the present article is basedcheck
* Provide information separately for cases and controls. Note: An Explanation and Elaboration article discusses each checklist item and provides methodological background and published examples of transparent reporting. Information on the STROBE Initiative is available at http://www.strobe-statement.org, access date 15 January 2021.

References

  1. Parslow, R.C.; Morris, K.P.; Tasker, R.; Forsyth, R.; Hawley, C.A. Epidemiology of traumatic brain injury in children receiving intensive care in the UK. Arch. Dis. Child. 2005, 90, 1182–1187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Duhaime, A.C.; Alario, A.J.; Lewander, W.J.; Schut, L.; Sutton, L.N.; Seidl, T.S.; Nudelman, S.; Budenz, D.; Hertle, R.; Tsiaras, W. Head injury in very young children: Mechanisms, injury types, and ophthalmologic findings in 100 hospitalized patients younger than 2 years of age. Pediatrics 1992, 90, 179–185. [Google Scholar]
  3. Jordan, L.C.; Johnston, S.C.; Wu, Y.W.; Sidney, S.; Fullerton, H.J. The importance of cerebral aneurysms in childhood hemorrhagic stroke: A population-based study. Stroke 2009, 40, 400–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. Adelson, P.D.; Bratton, S.L.; Carney, N.A.; Chesnut, M.R.; Du Courday, H.E.M.; Goldstein, B.; Kochanek, M.P.; Miller, C.H.; Partington, M.D.; Selden, N.R.; et al. Guidelines for the acute medical management of severe traumatic brain injury in infants, children, and adolescents. Chapter 1: Introduction. Pediatr. Crit. Care Med. 2003, 4 (Suppl. 3), S2–S4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Mandera, M.; Zralek, C.; Krawczyk, I.; Życiński, A.; Wencel, T.; Bażowski, P. Surgery or conservative treatment in children with traumatic intracerebral haematoma. Child’s Nerv. Syst. 1999, 15, 267–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Bullock, R.; Golek, J.; Blake, G. Traumatic intracerebral hematoma—Which patients should undergo surgical evacuation? CT scan features and ICP monitoring as a basis for decision making. Surg. Neurol. 1989, 32, 181–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Nordstrom, C.-H.; Messeter, K.; Sundbärg, J.G.; Wahlander, S. Severe traumatic brain lesions in Sweden. Part I: Aspects of management in non-neurosurgical clinics. Brain Inj. 1989, 3, 247–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Singounas, E.G. Severe head injury in a paediatric population. J. Neurosurg. Sci. 1992, 36, 201–206. [Google Scholar]
  9. Lo, W.D.; Lee, J.; Rusin, J.; Perkins, E.; Roach, E.S. Intracranial hemorrhage in children: An evolving spectrum. Arch Neurol. 2008, 65, 1629–1633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Zakhary, M.M.; Wesolowski, J.R.; Sewick, A.E.; Carlson, M.; Mehrotha, N.; Malý, P.; Sundgren, P.C. Prevalence and Etiology of Intracranial Hemorrhage in Term Children Under the Age of Two Years: A Retrospective Study of Computerized Tomographic Imaging and Clinical Outcome in 798 Children. Acad. Radiol. 2009, 16, 572–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Hamilton, M.; Mrazik, M.; Johnson, D.W. Incidence of delayed intracranial hemorrhage in children after un-complicated minor head injuries. Pediatrics 2010, 126, e33–e39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Karibe, H.; Kameyama, M.; Hayashi, T.; Narisawa, A.; Tominaga, T. Acute Subdural Hematoma in Infants with Abusive Head Trauma: A Literature Review. Neurol. Med. Chir. 2016, 56, 264–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Sorokina, E.G.; Semenova, Z.B.; Averianova, N.S.; Karaseva, O.V.; Arsenieva, E.; Luk’yanov, V.I.; Reutov, V.P.; Asanov, A.Y.; Roshal, L.M.; Pinelis, V.G. APOE gene polymorphism and markers of brain damage in the outcomes of severe traumatic brain injury in children. Zhurnal Nevrol. Psikhiatrii Korsakova 2020, 120, 72–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Ferrete-Araujo, A.M.; Egea-Guerrero, J.J.; Vilches-Arenas, A.; Godoy, D.A.; Murillo-Cabezas, F. Predictors of mortality and poor functional outcome in severe spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage: A prospective observational study. Med. Intensiva 2015, 39, 422–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Jordan, L.C.; Kleinman, J.T.; Hillis, A.E. Intracerebral Hemorrhage Volume Predicts Poor Neurologic Outcome in Children. Stroke 2009, 40, 1666–1671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Kleinman, J.T.; Hillis, A.E.; Jordan, L.C. ABC/2: Estimating intracerebral haemorrhage volume and total brain volume, and predicting outcome in children. Dev. Med. Child Neurol. 2010, 53, 281–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Kochanek, P.M.; Tasker, R.C.; Carney, N.; Totten, A.M.; Adelson, P.D.; Selden, N.R.; Davis-O’Reilly, C.; Hart, E.L.; Bell, M.J.; Bratton, S.L.; et al. Guidelines for the Management of Pediatric Severe Traumatic Brain Injury, Third Edition: Update of the Brain Trauma Foundation Guidelines, Executive Summary. Neurosurgery 2019, 84, 1169–1178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Das Schädel-Hirn-Trauma im Kindesalter. 2018. Available online: http://www.leitliniensekretariat.de/files/MyLayout/pdf/024-018l_S2k_Schaedel-Hirn-Trauma_im_Kindesalter-2011-03.pdf (accessed on 20 September 2021).
  19. Maas, A.I.; Hukkelhoven, C.W.; Marshall, L.F.; Steyerberg, E.W. Prediction of outcome in traumatic brain injury with computed tomographic characteristics: A comparison between the computed tomographic classification and combinations of computed tomographic predictors. Neurosurgery 2005, 57, 1173–1782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Meyer-Heim, A.D.; Boltshauser, E. Spontaneous intracranial haemorrhage in children: Aetiology, presentation and outcome. Brain Dev. 2003, 25, 416–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Lin, C.L.; Loh, J.K.; Kwan, A.L.; Howng, S.L. Spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage in children. Kaohsiung J. Med. Sci. 1999, 15, 146–151. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  22. Al-Jarallah, A.; Al-Rifai, M.T.; Riela, A.R.; Roach, E.S. Nontraumatic Brain Hemorrhage in Children: Etiology and Presentation. J. Child Neurol. 2000, 15, 284–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Kumar, R.; Shukla, D.; Mahapatra, A. Spontaneous Intracranial Hemorrhage in Children. Pediatr. Neurosurg. 2009, 45, 37–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Kang, J.K.; Park, C.K.; Kim, M.C.; Kim, D.S.; Song, J.U. Traumatic isolated intracerebral hemorrhage in children. Child’s Nerv. Syst. 1989, 5, 303–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Ruf, B.; Heckmann, M.; Schroth, I.; Hügens-Penzel, M.; Reiss, I.; Borkhardt, A.; Gortner, L.; Jödicke, A. Early decompressive craniectomy and duraplasty for refractory intracranial hypertension in children: Results of a pilot study. Crit. Care 2003, 7, R133–R138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  26. Mhanna, M.J.; Mallah, W.E.; Verrees, M.; Shah, R.; Super, D.M. Outcome of children with severe traumatic brain injury who are treated with decompressive craniectomy. J. Neurosurg. Pediatr. 2015, 16, 508–514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Taylor, A.; Butt, W.; Rosenfeld, J.; Shann, F.; Ditchfield, M.; Lewis, E.; Klug, G.; Wallace, D.; Henning, R.; Tibballs, J. A randomized trial of very early decompressive craniectomy in children with traumatic brain injury and sustained intracranial hypertension. Child’s Nerv. Syst. 2001, 17, 154–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Skoglund, T.S.; Eriksson-Ritzén, C.; Jensen, C.; Rydenhag, B. Aspects on Decompressive Craniectomy in Patients with Traumatic Head Injuries. J. Neurotrauma 2006, 23, 1502–1509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Thomale, U.-W.; Graetz, D.; Vajkoczy, P.; Sarrafzadeh, A.S. Severe traumatic brain injury in children—A single center experience regarding therapy and long-term outcome. Child’s Nerv. Syst. 2010, 26, 1563–1573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Sorokina, E.G.; Reutov, V.P.; Pinelis, V.; Vinskaya, N.P.; Vergun, O.V.; Khodorov, B.I. The mechanism of potentiation of the glutamate-induced neurotoxicity by serum albumin. A possible role of nitric oxide. Membr. Cell Biol. 2000, 13, 389–396. [Google Scholar]
  31. Sorokina, E.G.; Semenova, Z.B.; Reutov, V.P.; Arsenieva, E.N.; Karaseva, O.V.; Fisenko, A.P.; Roshal, L.M.; Pinelis, V.G. Brain Biomarkers in Children After Mild and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury; Springer Science and Business Media LLC.: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2021; Volume 131, pp. 103–107. [Google Scholar]
  32. Wolf, H.; Machold, W.; Frantal, S.; Kecht, M.; Pajenda, G.; Leitgeb, J.; Widhalm, H.; Hajdu, S.; Sarahrudi, K. Risk factors indicating the need for cranial CT scans in elderly patients with head trauma: An Austrian trial and comparison with the Canadian CT Head Rule. J. Neurosurg. 2014, 120, 447–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Manfiotto, M.; Beccaria, K.; Rolland, A.; Paternoster, G.; Plas, B.; Boetto, S.; Vinchon, M.; Mottolese, C.; Beuriat, P.-A.; Szathmari, A.; et al. Decompressive Craniectomy in Children with Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: A Multicenter Retrospective Study and Literature Review. World Neurosurg. 2019, 129, e56–e62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Beuriat, P.-A.; Javouhey, E.; Szathmari, A.; Courtil-Tesseydre, S.; Desgranges, F.P.; Grassiot, B.; Hequet, O.; Mottolese, C. Decompressive craniectomy in the treatment of post-traumatic intracranial hypertension in children: Our philosophy and indications. J. Neurosurg. Sci. 2015, 59, 405–428. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  35. Ghajar, J.; Hariri, R.J. Management of Pediatric Head Injury. Pediatr. Clin. N. Am. 1992, 39, 1093–1125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Caroli, M.; Locatelli, M.; Campanella, R.; Balbi, S.; Martinelli, F.; Arienta, C. Multiple intracranial lesions in head injury: Clinical considerations, prognostic factors, management, and results in 95 patients. Surg. Neurol. 2001, 56, 82–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Lobato, R.D.; Cordobes, F.; Rivas, J.J.; De La Fuente, M.; Montero, A.; Barcena, A.; Perez, C.; Cabrera, A.; Lamas, E. Outcome from severe head injury related to the type of intracranial lesion. J. Neurosurg. 1983, 59, 762–774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Bullock, M.R.; Chesnut, R.; Ghajar, J.; Gordon, D.; Härtl, R.; Newell, D.W.; Servadei, F.; Walters, B.C.; Wilberger, J. Surgical Management of Traumatic Parenchymal Lesions. Neurosurgery 2006, 58, S2–S25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Lackland, D.T.; Roccella, E.J.; Deutsch, A.F.; Fornage, M.; George, M.G.; Howard, G.; Kissela, B.M.; Kittner, S.J.; Lichtman, J.H.; Lisabeth, L.D.; et al. Factors influencing the decline in stroke mortality: A statement from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke 2014, 45, 315–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Zahuranec, D.B.; Lisabeth, L.D.; Sánchez, B.N.; Smith, M.A.; Brown, D.L.; Garcia, N.M.; Skolarus, L.E.; Meurer, W.J.; Burke, J.F.; Adelman, E.E.; et al. Intracerebral hemorrhage mortality is not changing despite declining incidence. Neurology 2014, 82, 2180–2186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Alberico, A.M.; Ward, J.D.; Choi, S.C.; Marmarou, A.; Young, H.F. Outcome after severe head injury. Relationship to mass lesions, diffuse injury, and ICP course in pediatric and adult patients. J. Neurosurg. 1987, 67, 648–656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Wu, E.; Marthi, S.; Asaad, W.F. Predictors of Mortality in Traumatic Intracranial Hemorrhage: A National Trauma Data Bank Study. Front. Neurol. 2020, 11, 587587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Figaji, A.A.; Fieggen, A.G.; Peter, J.C.; Fieggen, G. Early decompressive craniotomy in children with severe traumatic brain injury. Child’s Nerv. Syst. 2003, 19, 666–673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Reece, R.M.; Sege, R. Childhood head injuries: Accidental or inflicted? Arch. Pediatr. Adolesc. Med. 2000, 154, 11–15. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  45. Vinchon, M.; Defoort-Dhellemmes, S.; Desurmont, M.; Dhellemmes, P. Accidental and nonaccidental head injuries in infants: A prospective study. J. Neurosurg. Pediatr. 2005, 102, 380–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Duhaime, A.C.; Christian, C.W.; Rorke, L.B.; Zimmerman, R.A. Nonaccidental head injury in infants—The “shaken-baby syndrome”. N. Engl. J. Med. 1998, 338, 1822–1829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Parent, A.D. Pediatric chronic subdural hematoma: A retrospective comparative analysis. Pediatr. Neurosurg. 1992, 18, 266–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Case, M.E. Inflicted Traumatic Brain Injury in Infants and Young Children. Brain Pathol. 2008, 18, 571–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Jayawant, S.; Parr, J. Outcome following subdural haemorrhages in infancy. Arch. Dis. Child. 2007, 92, 343–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Children 08 00854 g001 550
Figure 1. Differences in conservative versus delayed surgical versus operative treatment regarding diagnosis, midline shift and compression of the basal cisterns in relation to patient number in percentages. * = significant; ** = highly significant.
Figure 1. Differences in conservative versus delayed surgical versus operative treatment regarding diagnosis, midline shift and compression of the basal cisterns in relation to patient number in percentages. * = significant; ** = highly significant.
Children 08 00854 g001
Children 08 00854 g002 550
Figure 2. Detailed overview of intracranial pressure (in millimeter of mercury) measured at time of surgery.
Figure 2. Detailed overview of intracranial pressure (in millimeter of mercury) measured at time of surgery.
Children 08 00854 g002
Table
Table 1. Demographic characteristics of patients and characteristics of trauma in conservatively and surgically managed pediatric TBI patients with ICB.
Table 1. Demographic characteristics of patients and characteristics of trauma in conservatively and surgically managed pediatric TBI patients with ICB.
MeasureConservativeDelayed SurgeryOperativeTotalp-Value
Total N (%)38 (48%)12 (15%)29 (37%)79
Age (median, IQR)8.5 (6–13)7.5 (2.75–11.75)10 (2–14)8 (3.5–14)0.874
Gender (N, % male)21 (55%)7 (58%)19 (66%)47 (60%)0.695
Trauma mechanism (N, %)/////
Brawl001 (3%)1 (1%)0.629
Fall (50–150 cm)2 (5%)1 (8%)1 (3%)4 (5%)
Fall (<50 cm)2 (5%)002 (3%)
Fall (>150 cm)6 (16%)4 (33%)11 (38%)21 (26%)/
Traffic accident23 (61%)7 (58%)15 (52%)45 (57%)/
Sports2 (5%)01 (3%)3 (4%)
Battered child syndrome2 (5%)002 (3%)
Other1 (3%)001 (1%)
Multiple trauma (N, % Yes)24 (63%)9 (75%)26 (90%)59 (75%)0.04 *
N = number, IQR = interquartile range; * = significant.
Table
Table 2. Injury severity indicators in conservatively and surgically managed pediatric TBI patients with ICB.
Table 2. Injury severity indicators in conservatively and surgically managed pediatric TBI patients with ICB.
Measure/Treatment TypeConservativeDelayed SurgeryOperativeTotalp-Value
Total N (%)38 (48%)12 (15%)29 (37%)79
Symptoms indicating TBI (N, % Yes)/////
External Swellings19 (50%)8 (67%)12 (41%)39 (49%)0.335
Nausea6 (16%)2 (17%)1 (3%)9 (11%)<0.01
Vomiting5 (13%)3 (25%)4 (14%)12 (15%)0.41
Unconsciousness (N, % present)17 (45%)7 (58%)21 (72%)45 (57%)0.22
Neurological status (N, %)/////
Normal15 (40%)01 (3%)16 (20%)<0.001 **
Somnolent12 (32%)5 (42%)5 (17%)22 (28%)
Comatose11 (29%)6 (50%)23 (79%)40 (51%)
Pupils (N, %)/////
Both reactive28 (74%)8 (67%)17 (59%)53 (67%)0.679
One reactive4 (11%)1 (8%)3 (10%)8 (10%)
None reactive6 (16%)3 (25%)9 (31%)18 (23%)
ISS (median, IQR)16 (9–21)25 (17–30)24 (17–29)20 (15–26)<0.01 **
First pediatric GCS (median, IQR)8.5 (6–13)7.5 (3–12)10 (2–14)8 (3.5–14)0.869
Admission pediatric GCS (median, IQR)8.5 (6–13)7.5 (3–12)10 (2–14)8 (3.5–14)0.869
Vertebral Fracture (N, %)/////
Neck Region4 (11%)1 (8%)1 (3%)6 (8%)0.553
Thorax Region2 (5%)01 (3%)3 (4%)0.7
Additional Injuries (N, %)/////
Upper extremity Fracture6 (16%)2 (17%)3 (10%)11 (14%)0.779
Lower Extremity Fracture5 (13%)2 (17%)5 (17%)12 (15%)0.824
Injury to thoracic region8 (21%)4 (33%)11 (38%)23 (29%)0.18
Injury to abdominal region5 (13%)2 (17%)5 (17%)12 (15%)0.888
Rotterdam CT Score (N, %)/////
100000.038 *
26 (16%)3 (25%)3 (10%)12 (15%)
324 (63%)7 (58%)9 (31%)40 (51%)
42 (5%)2 (17%)8 (28%)12 (15%)
53 (8%)07 (24%)10 (13%)
63 (8%)02 (7%)5 (6%)
CT = computed tomography; GCS = Glasgow coma scale; IQR = interquartile range; ISS = injury severity score; N = number; TBI = traumatic brain injury; ** = highly significant; * = significant.
Table
Table 3. Treatment factors in conservatively and surgically managed pediatric TBI patients with ICB.
Table 3. Treatment factors in conservatively and surgically managed pediatric TBI patients with ICB.
Measure/Treatment TypeConservativeDelayed SurgeryOperativeTotalp-Value
Total N (%)38 (48%)12 (15%)29 (37%)79
Transport (N, % Air)11 (29%)5 (42%)17 (59%)33 (42%)0.142
Intubation (N, %)12 (32%)7 (58%)23 (79%)42 (53%)<0.001 **
X-Ray performed (N, %)27 (71%)10 (83%)25 (86%)62 (79%)0.296
CT scan performed (N, %)38 (100%)12 (100%)29 (100%)79 (100%)1
MR performed (N, %)7 (18%)3 (25%)7 (24%)17 (22%)0.811
ICU days (N, %)/////
No ICU admission22 (58%)0022 (28%)<0.001 **
≤10 days11 (29%)4 (33%)12 (41%)27 (34%)
11–20 days1 (3%)3 (25%)5 (17%)9 (11%)
21–30 days3 (8%)3 (25%)6 (21%)12 (15%)
Over 30 days2 (5%)1 (8%)6 (21%)9 (11%)
CT = computed tomography; ICU = intermediate care unit; MR = magnetic resonance; N = number; ** = highly significant.
Table
Table 4. Treatment factors in surgically managed pediatric TBI patients with ICB.
Table 4. Treatment factors in surgically managed pediatric TBI patients with ICB.
MeasureDelayed SurgeryOperativeTotalp-Value
/12 (29%)29 (71%)41
Surgery time (N, %)////
<1 h023 (100%)23 (76%)<0.001 **
<24 h12 (100%)012 (29%)
<1 week1 (8%)01 (2%)
<2 weeks1 (8%)01 (2%)
Delayed after 4 h2 (17%)02 (5%)
TBI surgeries within 24 h (N, %)////
One9 (75%)28 (97%)37 (90%)0.067
Two1 (8%)1 (3%)2 (5%)
None2 (17%)02 (5%)
Overall number of TBI surgeries (N, %)////
One9 (75%)19 (66%)28 (68%)0.9
Two2 (17%)7 (24%)9 (22%)
Three1 (8%)2 (7%)3 (7%)
Four01 (3%)1 (2%)
Other Surgery (N, %)////
Multiple surgery03 (10%)3 (7%)0.792
Osteosynthesis (external)2 (17%)2 (7%)4 (10%)
Osteosynthesis (internal)1 (8%)2 (7%)3 (7%)
Mediastinal drain01 (3%)1 (2%)
Other1 (8%)2 (7%)3 (7%)
None8 (67%)18 (62%)26 (63%)
Parenchymal ICP monitor (N, %)9 (75%)25 (86%)34 (83%)0.397
Ventricular drain (N, %)5 (42%)4 (14%)9 (22%)0.092
Days of ICP monitoring (N, %)////
≤10 days5 (41%)16 (55%)21 (51%)0.323
11–20 days2 (17%)4 (14%)7 (17%)
21–30 days2 (17%)4 (14%)6 (15%)
31+ days1 (8%)2 (7%)3 (7%)
None2 (17%)3 (10%)5 (12%)
CI = confidence interval; ICP = intracranial pressure; N = number; TBI = traumatic brain injury; ** = highly significant.
Table
Table 5. Outcomes in conservatively and surgically managed pediatric TBI patients with ICB.
Table 5. Outcomes in conservatively and surgically managed pediatric TBI patients with ICB.
Measure/Treatment TypeConservativeDelayed SurgeryOperativeTotal
38 (48%)12 (15%)29 (37%)79
GOS–hospital discharge (N, %)////
Death4 (11%)1 (8%)6 (21%)11 (14%)
Vegetative state001 (3%)1 (3%)
Severe disability2 (5%)3 (25%)3 (10%)8 (10%)
Moderate disability3 (8%)2 (17%)12 (41%)17 (22%)
Good recovery28 (74%)6 (50%)6 (21%)40 (51%)
Unknown1 (3%)01 (3%)2 (3%)
GOS–follow up (N, %)////
Death4 (11%)1 (8%)6 (21%)11 (14%)
Vegetative state001 (3%)1 (1%)
Severe disability01 (8%)1 (3%)2 (3%)
Moderate disability1 (3%)1 (8%)3 (10%)5 (6%)
Good recovery22 (58%)6 (50%)13 (45%)41 (52%)
Unknown11 (29%)3 (25%)5 (17%)19 (24%)
Time of Death (N, %)////
Survivors34 (90%)11 (92%)23 (79%)68 (86%)
Within 24 h3 (8%)03 (10%)6 (8%)
Within 48 h1 (3%)02 (7%)3 (4%)
Within 14 days01 (8%)01 (1%)
Within 21 days001 (3%)1 (1%)
Cause of death (N, %)////
Survivors34 (90%)11 (92%)23 (79%)68 (86%)
Brain death2 (5%)04 (14%)6 (8%)
Cardiovascular failure2 (5%)1 (8%)02 (4%)
Respiratory/Pulmonary failure001 (3%)1 (1%)
Multiorgan failure (sepsis)001 (3%)1 (1%)
GOS = Glasgow outcome scale; N = number.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Binder, H.; Majdan, M.; Leitgeb, J.; Payr, S.; Breuer, R.; Hajdu, S.; Tiefenboeck, T.M. Management and Outcome of Traumatic Intracerebral Hemorrhage in 79 Infants and Children from a Single Level 1 Trauma Center. Children 2021, 8, 854. https://doi.org/10.3390/children8100854

AMA Style

Binder H, Majdan M, Leitgeb J, Payr S, Breuer R, Hajdu S, Tiefenboeck TM. Management and Outcome of Traumatic Intracerebral Hemorrhage in 79 Infants and Children from a Single Level 1 Trauma Center. Children. 2021; 8(10):854. https://doi.org/10.3390/children8100854

Chicago/Turabian Style

Binder, Harald, Marek Majdan, Johannes Leitgeb, Stephan Payr, Robert Breuer, Stefan Hajdu, and Thomas M. Tiefenboeck. 2021. "Management and Outcome of Traumatic Intracerebral Hemorrhage in 79 Infants and Children from a Single Level 1 Trauma Center" Children 8, no. 10: 854. https://doi.org/10.3390/children8100854

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop