A Nationwide Questionnaire Survey on Awake Craniotomy in Japan

5Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The number of awake craniotomies is increasing because of its beneficial features. However, not enough information is available regarding the current status of awake craniotomy in Japan. To evaluate the current status of awake craniotomy in institutes, a nationwide questionnaire survey was conducted. From June to August 2019, we conducted a questionnaire survey on awake craniotomy in the neurosurgery department of 45 institutes that perform awake craniotomies in Japan. Responses were obtained from 39 institutes (response rate, 86.7%). The main methods of awake craniotomy were almost the same in all institutes. Twenty-six institutes (66.7%) had fewer than 10 awake craniotomies (low-volume institutes) per year, and 13 high-volume institutes (33.3%) performed more than 10 awake craniotomies annually. Some institutes experienced a relatively high frequency of adverse events. In 11 institutes (28.2%), the frequency of intraoperative seizures was more than 10%. An intraoperative seizure frequency of 1%-9%, 10%-29%, and over 30% was identified in 12 (92%), 0 (0%), and 1 (8%) of the high-volume institutes, which was significantly less than in 16 (62%), 10 (38%), and 0 (0%) of the lowvolume institutes (p = 0.0059). The routine usage of preoperative antiepileptic drugs was not different between them, but the old type was used more often in the low-volume institutes (p = 0.0022). Taken together, the annual number of awake craniotomies was less than 10 in over two-thirds of the institutes. Fewer intraoperative seizures were reported in the high-volume institutes, which tend not to preoperatively use the old type of antiepileptic drugs.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kawata, M., Fukui, A., Mineharu, Y., Kikuchi, T., Yamao, Y., Yamamoto Hattori, E., … Arakawa, Y. (2022). A Nationwide Questionnaire Survey on Awake Craniotomy in Japan. Neurologia Medico-Chirurgica, 62(6), 278–285. https://doi.org/10.2176/jns-nmc.2021-0290

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free