Bilateral decompressive craniectomy in pediatric patients: A systematic review

Abstract

Abstract

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) and other acute neurological insults remain leading causes of pediatric morbidity and mortality. In cases where elevated intracranial pressure (ICP) is refractory to maximal medical therapy, decompressive craniectomy (DC) may be considered as a salvage intervention. Although bilateral, bifrontal, bitemporal, and cruciate decompressive approaches are used in selected patients with diffuse cerebral edema or bihemispheric swelling, their role, timing, complications, and outcomes remain poorly defined in pediatric populations. Following PRISMA guidelines, PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and PubMed Central were searched for English-language studies reporting bifrontal, bitemporal, bilateral, or cruciate decompressive craniectomy in pediatric or young adult patients, defined a priori as age ≤ 21 years, with refractory intracranial hypertension from traumatic or non-traumatic etiologies. Studies were included only if the cohort met this age criterion or if pediatric/young adult outcomes could be separately extracted. Mixed-age studies without extractable pediatric/young adult data were excluded from the primary synthesis. Data regarding demographics, operative technique, timing, mortality, complications, ICP response, and functional outcomes were extracted and synthesized qualitatively because of clinical and methodological heterogeneity. Five studies met eligibility criteria for the primary pediatric/young adult synthesis, including one small randomized pilot trial and four observational cohorts. The available evidence was heterogeneous with respect to indication, ICP threshold, timing of surgery, operative technique, and outcome measurement. Bitemporal, bifrontal, bilateral, and cruciate decompressive strategies were reported primarily in selected patients with severe traumatic brain injury or diffuse cerebral swelling. Several larger pediatric decompressive craniectomy cohorts included only small bilateral or bifrontal subgroups, and outcomes were not always stratified by technique. Reported mortality, functional recovery, hydrocephalus, subgaleal collections, and need for reoperation varied across studies. Early decompression was associated with ICP reduction and favorable outcomes in limited reports, including one small randomized trial, but the evidence remains insufficient to determine comparative efficacy, optimal timing, or superiority of one bilateral decompressive approach. Bilateral, bifrontal, bitemporal, and cruciate decompressive craniectomy have been reported as feasible salvage strategies for carefully selected pediatric and young adult patients with refractory intracranial hypertension. However, current evidence is sparse, heterogeneous, and often not technique-specific. Therefore, definitive conclusions regarding efficacy, optimal timing, or superiority of one bilateral approach cannot be made. Prospective multicenter studies with standardized age definitions, ICP thresholds, operative taxonomy, complication reporting, and long-term neurocognitive outcomes are needed.