Search

Introduction: Planning cranioplasty (CPL) in patients with suspected or proven post-traumatic hydrocephalus (PTH) poses a significant management challenge due to a lack of clear guidance. Research question: This project aims to create a European document to improve adherence and adapt to local protocols based on available resources and national health systems. Methods: After a thorough non-systematic review, a steering committee (SC) formed a European expert panel (EP) for a two-round questionnaire using the Delphi method. The questionnaire employed a 9-point Likert scale to assess the appropriateness of statements inherent to two sections: ''Diagnostic criteria for PTH'' and ''Surgical strategies for PTH and cranial reconstruction.'' Results: The panel reached a consensus on 29 statements. In the ''Diagnostic criteria for PTH'' section, five statements were deemed ''appropriate'' (consensus 74.2−90.3 %), two were labeled ''inappropriate,'' and seven were marked as ''uncertain.''In the ''Surgical strategies for PTH and cranial reconstruction'' section, four statements were considered ''appropriate'' (consensus 74.2−90.4 %), six were ''inappropriate,'' and five were ''uncertain.'' Discussion and conclusion: Planning a cranioplasty alongside hydrocephalus remains a significant challenge in neurosurgery. Our consensus conference suggests that, in patients with cranial decompression and suspected hydrocephalus, the most suitable diagnostic approach involves a combination of evolving clinical conditions and neuroradiological imaging. The recommended management sequence prioritizes cranial reconstruction, with the option of a ventriculoperitoneal shunt when needed, preferably with a programmable valve. We strongly recommend to adopt local protocols based on expert consensus, such as this, to guide patient care.

Introduction: Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring (IOM) is widely used in neurosurgery but specific guidelines are lacking. Therefore, we can assume differences in IOM application between Neurosurgical centers. Research question: The section of Functional Neurosurgery of the Italian Society of Neurosurgery realized a survey aiming to obtain general data on the current practice of IOM in Italy. Materials and methods: A 22-item questionnaire was designed focusing on: volume procedures, indications, awake surgery, experience, organization and equipe. The questionnaire has been sent to Italian Neurosurgery centers. Results: A total of 54 centers completed the survey. The annual volume of surgeries range from 300 to 2000, and IOM is used in 10–20% of the procedures. In 46% of the cases is a neurologist or a neurophysiologist who performs IOM. For supra-tentorial pathology, almost all perform MEPs (94%) SSEPs (89%), direct cortical stimulation (85%). All centers perform IOM in spinal surgery and 95% in posterior fossa surgery. Among the 50% that perform peripheral nerve surgery, all use IOM. Awake surgery is performed by 70% of centers. The neurosurgeon is the only responsible for IOM in 35% of centers. In 83% of cases IOM implementation is adequate to the request. Discussion and conclusions: The Italian Neurosurgical centers perform IOM with high level of specialization, but differences exist in organization, techniques, and expertise. Our survey provides a snapshot of the state of the art in Italy and it could be a starting point to implement a consensus on the practice of IOM.