MATERIAL and METHODS: We reviewed the clinical records of patients who were divided into two groups according to the treatment choices in our center, and the effective rate of effusion removal and the standardized morbidity ratio of poor prognosis were compared.

RESULTS: Eighty patients were identified, and divided into two groups: conservative treatment and surgical procedure group. The mean CRASH-CT predicted risk of mortality in two weeks and unfavorable outcome at six months was higher in the surgical procedure group compared with the conservative treatment group. Effective rate of effusion removal was observed in 57.1 % of conservative treatment group versus 88.5% of surgical procedure group (p=0.002). The standardized morbidity ratio of poor prognosis (observed/expected poor prognosis) was 0.56 (95 % CI: 0.32–0.80) for the conservative treatment group versus 0.25 (95 % CI: 18 0.08-0.42) for the surgical procedure group.

CONCLUSION: Conservative treatment and surgical procedure are used for the management of traumatic subdural effusion, and the former is used more commonly to treat the mildly affected patients than the latter one, but a surgical procedure may be more effective for the patients in poor clinical condition. Adequate evidence is required to clear the indications. Keywords : Traumatic subdural effusion, Conservative treatment, Surgical procedure