Role of Craniectomy Versus Craniotomy via the Retrosigmoid Approach in Decreasing the Incidence of Postoperative Headache

3Citations
Citations of this article
11Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: Postoperative headache is a major complaint after retrosigmoid surgery. Postoperative headache affects a patient’s quality of life. Craniotomy may have a role in the prevention of such headaches. We aimed to evaluate the role of craniectomy versus craniotomy via the retrosigmoid approach in reducing the incidence of postoperative headaches. Materials and methods: Patients who underwent surgery between January 2012 and December 2018 were retrospectively assessed and were classified into the craniectomy and craniotomy groups. Clinical data, such as those on age, sex, type of surgery, surgical repair technique, development of infection, postoperative cerebrospinal fluid leak, postoperative meningitis, size of the bone flap, and wound infection, were collected. The severity of headache in all patients was clinically assessed using the Catalano grading system. Results: Overall, 95 patients underwent microsurgery via the retrosigmoid approach. Of these, 48 were men and 47 were women. In total, 34 patients underwent craniectomy, and 61 patients underwent craniotomy. On discharge, postoperative headache was observed in 47% (16 of 34) and 21% (13 of 61) of patients who underwent craniectomy and craniotomy, respectively (P =.01). The incidence of headache decreased at follow-up. At 12 months after surgery, 15% of patients in the craniectomy group (5/34) and 2% of patients in the craniotomy group (2/61) experienced headache (P ¼ 0.01). Of the 61 patients in the craniotomy group, 2 (2%) had less severe headache at 12 months of follow-up.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Sezer, C., Gokten, M., Sezer, A., Gezgin, İ., Binboga, A. B., & Onay, M. (2022). Role of Craniectomy Versus Craniotomy via the Retrosigmoid Approach in Decreasing the Incidence of Postoperative Headache. International Surgery, 106(1), 32–38. https://doi.org/10.9738/INTSURG-D-21-00011.1

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