ISSN: 2643-4474

Raval et al. Neurosurg Cases Rev 2020, 3:046

DOI: 10.23937/2643-4474/1710046
Volume 3 | Issue 2

Neurosurgery - Cases and Reviews

Open Access

Case Report

Case Report: A Rare Case of Penetrating Trauma of Frontal

Sinus with Anterior Table Fracture
Himanshu Raval1*, Mona Bhatt2 and Nihar Gaur3
1
Department of Neurosurgery, NHL Municipal Medical College, SVP Hospital Campus, Gujarat, India Check for
updates
2
Medical Officer, CHC Dolasa, Gujarat, India
3
GAIMS-GK General Hospital, Gujarat, India

*Corresponding author: Dr. Himanshu Raval, Resident, Department of Neurosurgery, NHL Municipal Medical College,
SVP Hospital Campus, Elisbridge, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380006, India, Tel: 942-955-3329

Abstract Introduction
Background: Head injury is common component of any Road traffic accident (RTA) is the most common
road traffic accident injury. Injury involving only frontal sinus cause of cranio-facial injury and involvement of frontal
is uncommon and unique as its management algorithm is bone fractures are rare and constitute 5-9% of only fa-
changing over time with development of radiological modal-
ities as well as endoscopic intervention. Frontal sinus inju- cial trauma. The degree of association has been report-
ries may range from isolated anterior table fractures causing ed to be 95% with fractures of the anterior table or wall
a simple aesthetic deformity to complex fractures involving of the frontal sinuses, 60% with the orbital rims, and
the frontal recess, orbits, skull base, and intracranial con- 60% with complex injuries of the naso-orbital-ethmoid
tents. Only anterior table injury of frontal sinus is rare in pen-
region, 33% with other orbital wall fractures and 27%
etrating head injury without underlying brain injury with his-
tory of unconsciousness and questionable convulsion which with Le Fort level fractures. Blunt trauma is commonest
is new to existing literature. to involve frontal sinus [1]. Very few literatures avail-
Case description: A 72-years-old patient came with the able to enlighten the penetrating trauma and its extent
history of road traffic accident and a piece of wooden block wise management. Consultation with neurosurgeon
penetrating forehead. Though there is no apparent neuro- is required with priority in case of injury involving any
logical deficit on time of presentation but brief episode of part of skull bone. Radiological imaging plays important
unconsciousness and questionable convulsion activity just
after injury raise the question of possible brain insult and
role in accurate diagnosis and decision making of fur-
requirement of cranial opening. With availability of CT scan, ther management. Different specialty branch have their
extent of injury was measured. Cranialization, obliteration, way to manage frontal sinus injury. Neurosurgical com-
reconstruction, observation, and endoscopic sinus surgery plications may present acutely or may have a delayed
are available treatment modalities. Patient was treated with presentation. In the acute period, the main concern is
open reduction and internal fixation. There is no post-oper-
ative complication in subsequent follow-up. cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage, with risk of subse-
quent seeding of infection and progression to meningi-
Conclusion: The first impression that come across mind of
surgeon at trauma bay that penetrating head injury in frontal
tis or encephalitis. Delayed complications include brain
region with history of unconsciousness most likely to cause abscess and mucocele formation. Mucocele formation,
brain injury, this case shows no cranialization/craniotomy is which may result from obstruction of the frontal sinus
required in every case of penetrating injury and careful de- egress or direct trauma to the frontal sinus mucosa,
cision making save patient from post-operative morbidity.
may progress to a mucopyocele [2]. Significant intra-
Keywords cranial injury occurs more commonly with injury to the
Head injury, Frontal sinus, Outer table, Fracture frontal sinus (12-17% of the time) than with injury to the

Citation: Raval H, Bhatt M, Gaur N (2020) Case Report: A Rare Case of Penetrating Trauma of
Frontal Sinus with Anterior Table Fracture. Neurosurg Cases Rev 3:046. doi.org/10.23937/2643-
4474/1710046
Accepted: November 23, 2020; Published: November 25, 2020
Copyright: © 2020 Raval H, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction
in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Raval et al. Neurosurg Cases Rev 2020, 3:046 • Page 1 of 4 •

DOI: 10.23937/2643-4474/1710046 ISSN: 2643-4474

mandible or mid face due to the proximity of the frontal

sinus to the brain and the great forces required to cause
a frontal sinus fracture [3].
The uniqueness of this case report is patient’s pre-
sentation at trauma bay which include following: pres-
ence of intact foreign body in penetrating wound (which
is not reported yet), no neurological deficit with history
of unconsciousness and questionable convulsion.
Case Report
Following case report is noted as per CARE guideline.
Proper consent has been taken from patient in her na-
tive language. A 72-years-old female admitted in SVP
hospital in April, 2020 with complaint of forehead injury
and brief episode of unconsciousness due to collision
of bike with a tree, while she was a pillion rider. There
were no signs and symptoms of raised intracranial pres-
sure such as vomiting, difficulty in breathing and altered
consciousness but there was history of unconsciousness
and questionable convulsion which warrants neurosur-
gical attention. There was no leakage from nasal cavity
as well as from both ears. She was having no co-mor-
bidities and no previous operative history. She was
conscious, oriented and co-operative at time of pre-
sentation. On neurological examination, her Glasgow
coma scale was 15/15, cranial nerve examination was Figure 1: Penetrating injury over frontal region.
normal and no abnormalities were found in cerebellar
examination. Power and tone were normal. There was graft was obtained in single attempt with minimal sur-
no paresis, reflexes were normal. Sensory examination rounding trauma. The fat graft was then trimmed and
was normal. She was having no icterus, pallor, clubbing, inserted into the sinus cavity to exclude the possibility
cyanosis, edema and lymphadenopathy. On local exam- of future development of CSF fistula. The anterior table
ination there was a piece of wood which was piercing fragments are replaced.  Anterior table stabilization is
through her forehead just above medial end of left su- achieved with micro plates, and bone plate described
praorbital ridge. Dimension of entry wound was approx- as “Open Reduction and Internal Fixation”. Skin and soft
imately 3 × 3 cm size with oozing of blood at margins. tissue at local wound were approximated with non-ab-
There was slight edema surrounding it. There was no sorbable suture material and sterile dressing applied.
raccoon eye sign bilaterally. All routine investigations Coronal flap reposition carefully without development
were done and were within normal limits. Ct brain was of tension in suture line. There was no post-operative
done. It was showing fracture of anterior table of left leakage from wound or there was no nasal watery dis-
frontal sinus with presence of foreign body that had charge. During post-operative period, patient’s neuro-
pierced through the wound. All pre-operative workup logical examination was normal and there was no nasal
were done and the patient had giver consent after being discharge. She was treated with antibiotics, analgesics
informed of the risks of bleeding, infection, paresthesia, and anti-epileptics (it was for questionable convulsion
brain injury, CSF leak, meningitis, diplopia, visual loss, that patient had after injury) during post-operative pe-
external deformity, and late mucocele formation. Then riod. Patient was discharged on 3rd post-operative day.
patient is shifted to operative room. Coronal flap is used During follow up, suture were removed. There was no
and the full pericranial exposure was maintained. After any sign and symptoms suggestive of CSF rhinorrhea
full exposure foreign body carefully removed and thor- and convulsion over 3 months of follow-up (Figure 1 and
ough examination at local site was done. Fragments of Figure 2).
anterior table were carefully removed and kept moist.
Mucosa of frontal sinus is denuded from posterior ta- Discussion
ble and cavity is examined for any CSF leak with con- Term craniofacial territory comprise of region be-
current Valsalva maneuver. Then cavity is cauterized tween coronal suture and chin. The causes of craniofa-
and a small frontalis muscle plug is then placed into cial trauma reflect the general pattern of neurotrauma
the frontal recess to obliterate the ostia. A fat graft is but with significant regional variations. Globally, road
obtained through a left lower-quadrant (or periumbili- traffic accidents are the prime reason of neurotrauma
cal) incision using a separate, sterile instrument set. Fat and craniofacial trauma. In developed countries, an

Raval et al. Neurosurg Cases Rev 2020, 3:046 • Page 2 of 4 •

DOI: 10.23937/2643-4474/1710046 ISSN: 2643-4474

posure. Line of treatment can be decided by assessing

an anterior table fracture, a posterior table fracture,
a nasofrontal recess fracture, a dural tear (CSF leak),
and fracture displacement/comminution and as well
as degree of displacement [7,8]. In this case there is
only breach of anterior table that we can see in axial
cut. There is little risk of morbidity with non-displaced
anterior table fractures. Fractures having displacement
of 2 to 6 mm present has risk of mucocele formation.
Post-operative deformity chances increases with the
degree of fracture displacement. An endoscopic repair
may be possible if there is no wound over skin cover-
ing sinus site and posterior wall involved. Endoscopic
treatment requires experience of surgeon and his ex-
pertise with endoscope [9]. This avoids the need for a
coronal incision and also allows the patient to assess
the degree of deformity after all facial edema has re-
solved. Patient gets two scars in this case, one over lo-
cal trauma site and other of incision site. More complex
anterior table fractures and those that extend below
Figure 2: Axial cut showing anterior table fracture. the orbital rim may require open reduction using a cor-
onal incision.  Obliteration of the frontal sinus with fat
overall drop in transport injuries, the use of air bags in grafts through a frontal osteoplastic flap in patients with
motor vehicles, and the use of helmets by motorcyclists chronic sinusitis and mucocele formation has been ap-
have reduced the incidence of maxillofacial injury. Falls plied by some to the treatment of frontal sinus fractures
in infancy and old age have become major causes in [10]. In this case we have done open reduction with in-
many countries [4]. Though Primary mode of injury is ternal fixation. Though there was unconsciousness and
blunt trauma, this case is also caused by RTA but the dif- possibility of convulsion during post-traumatic phase,
ference is patient is presented with intact foreign body sudden hypotension following trauma or coupe injury
pierced through her head. Usually the area over fron- might be the cause. Hence, we kept patient on levetirac-
tal sinuses is very well protected as due to presence of etam during post-operative phase [11].
relatively thicker cortical bone in comparison of other
Conclusion
regions [5]. Frontal sinus injury is common in patients
who have experienced trauma. Various treatment al- This is a case report of an uncommon frontal bone
gorithms have been proposed, but there is little neuro- fracture involving only anterior wall of frontal sinus due
surgical literature to guide treatment strategies. Severe to penetrating injury with unconsciousness and ques-
infectious and structural complications occur if there is tionable convulsion. The management of frontal sinus
mismanagement of frontal sinus fractures [2]. In this fractures by neurosurgeons can be different based on
case absence of any neurological sign and symptoms extent of injury. One should not only rely on external
were striking feature as well as relieving factor but his- appearance of wound as well as clinical picture, it may
tory of unconsciousness and convulsion creates confu- mislead the diagnosis and further management. Histo-
sion and attract attention toward organic insult. Usually ry of unconsciousness is not thumb rule for brain insult
penetrating trauma of skull bones are associated with and cranial opening is not the answer whenever you see
brain injury. To rule out brain damage, a radiological in- penetrating head injury. However, the importance of
vestigation plays an important role. A thin-cut (1.0 to three dimensional imaging modality can be exceptional
1.5 mm) axial, coronal, and sagittal computed tomogra- which has led to accurate diagnosis and helpful in de-
phy (CT) scan is the radiological gold standard for diag- ciding management. The aim of treatment modality is
nosis of frontal sinus fractures. Information about the to restoration of normal anatomy with preservation of
anterior and posterior tables are obtained via axial cuts. all possible cosmetic aspect of face and prevention of
Coronal images can assess the sinus floor and orbital all possible complication like meningitis, CSF rhinorrhea,
roof. Sagittal reconstructions can be useful in assessing osteomyelitis as well as local infection. With possibili-
the patency of the frontal recess, and three-dimension- ty of various treatment modalities, one must decide on
al reconstructions are outstanding to provide exact vi- the basis of extent of injury, its outcome and patient’s
sualization of bony injury [6]. economic condition and no premature decision of emer-
Surgical treatment depends on wide exposure of the gency craniotomy/craniectomy is considered.
craniofacial skeleton via a bicoronal scalp flap or peri-
orbital, intraoral, and extraoral incisions. Here involve-
Author Contribution
ment of only frontal sinus warrants bicoronal flap ex- Dr. Himanshu Raval: Data acquisition and analysis,

Raval et al. Neurosurg Cases Rev 2020, 3:046 • Page 3 of 4 •

DOI: 10.23937/2643-4474/1710046 ISSN: 2643-4474

drafting, revision of manuscript. nus fractures: Analysis of treatment results. Arch Otolaryn-

gol Head Neck Surg 113: 933-935.
Dr. Mona Bhatt: Drafting, revision of the manuscript.
4. Iida S, Hassfeld S, Reuther T, Hans-Gert, Claudia H, et al.
Dr. Nihar Gaur: Drafting, revision of the manuscript. (2003) Maxillofacial fractures resulting from falls. J Cranio-
maxillofac Surg 31: 278.
Conflict of Interest 5. Nahum AM (1975) The biomechanics of maxillofacial trau-
None. ma. Clin Plast Surg 2: 59-64.
6. Hemmy DC, David DJ, Herman GT (1983) Three-dimen-
Acknowledgement sional recon­struction of craniofacial deformity using com-
None. puted tomography. Neurosurgery 13: 534.
7. Gruss JS (1990) Complex craniomaxillofacial trauma:
Funding Evolving concepts in management. A trauma unit’s experi-
ence-1989 Fraser B Gurd lecture. J Trauma 30: 377.
None.
8. David DJ (1974) Exploration of the orbital floor through a
References conjunctival approach. Aust N Z J Surg 44: 25.
1. Taylor P McGuire, Petrus P Gomes, Cameron ML Clokie, 9. Strong EB, Buchalter GM, Moulthrop TH (2003) Endoscopic
George KB Sandor (2006) Fractures of the supraorbital rim: repair of isolated anterior table frontal sinus fractures. Arch
Principles and management. J Can Dent Assoc 72: 537- Facial Plast Surg 5: 514-521.
540.
10. Bosley WR (1972) Osteoplastic obliteration of the frontal
2. Ravindra VM, Neil JA, Shah LM, Schmidt RH, Bisson EF sinus laryngoscope. Laryngoscope 82: 1463-1476.
(2015) Surgical management of traumatic frontal sinus frac-
11. Jones KE, Puccio AM, Harshman KJ, Bonnie F, Neal B, et
tures: Case series from a single institution and literature
al. (2008) Levetiracetam versus phenytoin for seizure pro-
review. Surg Neurol Int 6: 141.
phylaxis in severe traumatic brain injury. Neurosurg Focus.
3. AJ Duvall, DP Porto, D Lyons, LR Boies (1987) Frontal si-

Raval et al. Neurosurg Cases Rev 2020, 3:046 • Page 4 of 4 •