Cent Eur Neurosurg 2011; 72(04): 169-175
DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1286261
Original Article
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Post-Traumatic Frontal and Parieto-Occipital Extradural Haematomas: a Retrospective Analysis of 41 Patients and Review of the Literature

V. Balik
1   University Hospital Olomouc, Department of Neurosurgery, Olomouc, Czech Republic
H. Lehto
2   Helsinki University Hospital, Department of Neurosurgery, Helsinki, Finland
D. Hoza
3   Charles’s University and University Hospital in Motol, Department of Neurosurgery, Prague, Czech Republic
S. Phornsuwannapha
4   Police General Hospital, Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, Bangkok, Thailand
S. Toninelli
2   Helsinki University Hospital, Department of Neurosurgery, Helsinki, Finland
R. Romani
2   Helsinki University Hospital, Department of Neurosurgery, Helsinki, Finland
I. Sulla
5   Pavol Jozef Safarik University in Kosice, AD Centre, Department of Neurosurgery, Kosice, Slovak Republic
J. Hernesniemi
2   Helsinki University Hospital, Department of Neurosurgery, Helsinki, Finland
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
19 October 2011 (online)



The purpose of this study was to analyse the differences between patients with frontal (FEDH) or parieto-occipital (POEDH) epidural haematomas and evaluate possible statistically significant prognostic factors.

Material and methods:

In this retrospective study of a group of 41 patients with a FEDH (17) or POEDH (24 individuals), the authors analysed the influence of gender, age, type of injury, clinical presentation, Glasgow coma scale (GCS) score on admission, radiological findings, and time interval from trauma to surgery on outcomes. A good recovery and moderate disability were considered a “good” or “favourable outcome”, whereas severe disability, a vegetative state or death was a “poor outcome”.


In the POEDH subgroup, a higher GCS score on admission and a younger age were statistically significant prognostic factors for a better outcome (p=0.006, rs=0.702). In the subgroup of patients with FEDHs, the results were not significant. However, patients with FEDHs more frequently had “good outcomes” than members of the POEDH subgroup (88.2 vs. 70.9%). Children (≤ 18 years old) constituted a smaller portion of the POEDH subgroup (12.5%) than those in the FEDH subgroup (41.2%). The evaluation of time intervals between the accident and surgery (≤ 24 h vs. > 24 h) showed no significant influence on outcomes in any of the studied subgroups. However, patients undergoing surgery within 24 h of their injury had a less favourable GCS score on admission than those operated on more than 24 h after their injury. Subacute and chronic clinical courses predominated in patients with a FEDH (10/17 FEDH vs. 11/22 POEDH). Different accompanying intradural lesions occurred in 12 patients of the POEDH subgroup, but only in 2 of the FEDH subgroup (50 vs. 11.8%). However, the presence of such lesions did not significantly deteriorate surgical outcomes in either of the subgroups.