gms | German Medical Science

72. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Neurochirurgie (DGNC)
Joint Meeting mit der Polnischen Gesellschaft für Neurochirurgie

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Neurochirurgie (DGNC) e. V.

06.06. - 09.06.2021

Impact of incision type on wound healing in decompressive hemicraniectomy

Einfluss des Inzisionstyps auf die Wundheilung bei dekompressiver Hemikraniektomie

Meeting Abstract

Search Medline for

  • presenting/speaker Ntenis Nerntengian - Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Klinik für Neurochirurgie, Göttingen, Deutschland
  • Veit Rohde - Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Klinik für Neurochirurgie, Göttingen, Deutschland
  • Levent Tanrikulu - Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Klinik für Neurochirurgie, Göttingen, Deutschland

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Neurochirurgie. 72. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Neurochirurgie (DGNC), Joint Meeting mit der Polnischen Gesellschaft für Neurochirurgie. sine loco [digital], 06.-09.06.2021. Düsseldorf: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House; 2021. DocV029

doi: 10.3205/21dgnc031, urn:nbn:de:0183-21dgnc0314

Published: June 4, 2021

© 2021 Nerntengian et al.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. See license information at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.


Outline

Text

Objective: The goal of this study was to determine the differences in wound healing aspects between the classic reversed question mark incision and the retroauricular frontoparietooccipital incision in decompressive hemicraniectomy. The preliminary results of our observations were analyzed.

Methods: A total of 60 patients were recruited between 2018 and 2020 (Group A: 30 patients with reverse question mark incision & Group B: 30 patients with retroauricular frontoparietooccipital incision). The medical documentation of the included patients was analyzed for the occurrence of wound healing disturbances (dehiscence, infection). A two-sample t-test between proportions was performed to determine whether there was a significant difference between the two groups.

Results: 12 patients from Group A (40%) and 8 patients from Group B (27%) developed wound healing disturbances. There were no statistical significant differences referring wound healing disturbance in both groups and the demographic parameters did not statistically differ from each other.

Conclusion: In our preliminary results there was no statistical significance referring the rate of wound healing disturbances between the analyzed groups. Nevertheless we observed a noticeable trend to better wound healing rates with the retroauricular frontoparietooccipital incision compared to the classic question mark incision. A larger patient sample size is needed for a representative statistical analysis of wound healing aspects in decompressive hemicraniectomy.