개방성 분쇄 함몰 두개골절의 즉각 골편 복위술

• Published in: 대한신경외과학회지 Vol. 29; no. 5; pp. 668 - 674
• Main Authors: 조용준, 김영옥, 송준호, 황장회, 김성민, 안명수, 오세문, 안무업, Cho, Yong Jun, Kim, Young Ock, Song, Joon Ho, Hwang, Jang Hoi, Kim, Sung Min, Ahn, Myung Soo, Oh, Sae Moon, Ahn, Moo Eob
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: Korean
• Published: 2000
• Subjects: Compound comminuted depressed skull fracture; Primary repair; Postoperative infection
• ISSN: 1225-8245; 1598-7876

Objective : The classic and accepted surgical method of compound comminuted depressed skull fractures (FCCD) involves total resection of all the contaminated bone and fragments at the fracture site. A second operation for cranioplasty is then performed at a later date. However, we have believed that primary repair of these bony defects can be achieved by the replacement of bone fragments at the time of the initial debridement, and this can be accomplished without danger to patient. The authors retrospectively reviewed the surgical results to assess the advantages and disadvantages, and also propose the selection criteria of replacement of fractured bone fragments as a primary procedure in FCCD. Materials and Methods : The authors analyzed the data extracted from medical records, and radiological findings in 22 of 71 patients with FCCD, who underwent immediate replacement of fractured bone fragments between April 1993 and October 1998. The mean follow-up period was 13.7 months. The selection criteria for the operation included the patients with mild to moderate severity, regardless of the degree of contamination or dural violation, which presented in hospital within 24 hours of injury. Results : The ages of the patients varied from 4 to 63 years, and there were 20 males and 2 females. Seventeen of 22 patients were fully conscious on admission and the others also had relatively good Glasgow coma scales. Sixteen fractures were located in the frontal area, 9 with involvement of the frontal sinuses, and 6 in the parietal and temporoparietal areas. Of the 22 patients, 8(36.3%) had dural lacerations with 3 of these requiring patching with pericranium, and 12(54.5%) had intracranial hematoma requiring wide craniotomy. The degree of wound contamination was also variable. Fifteen patients had relatively clean wounds, while seven(31.8%) had seriously contaminated wounds with soil, sand, hair, and wood. Only one patient(4.5%) developed infection, and the bone fragments were removed. All wounds healed primarily without pulsatile defect, the skull has remained solid, and no complications have occurred, except the infected case. Conclusion : It is proposed that bone fragments removal for FCCD, regardless of the degree of contamination or dural violation, is not necessary and that primary bone fragments replacement avoids a second operation for cranioplasty.