Neurosurgery · 2024
Middle Meningeal Artery Embolization for "Trial-Ineligible" Chronic Subdural Hematomas.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ma Li, Hoz Samer S, Doheim Mohamed F, Fadhil Ali, Sultany Abdullah, Al-Bayati Alhamza R, Nogueira Raul G, Lang Michael J, Gross Bradley A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The benefit of middle meningeal artery embolization (MMAE) in the treatment of chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH) has been recently demonstrated in a series of clinical trials. Whether MMAE benefits "trial-ineligible" patients remains elusive. We thus sought to explore the potential benefit of MMAE in neurologically stable (modified Rankin Scale ≤3) patients with "trial-ineligible" CSDHs because of large size: Thickness >15 mm and/or midline shift ≥5 mm.
METHODS: A prospectively maintained database was reviewed to identify trial-ineligible CSDHs undergoing standalone MMAE. Surgical rescue rate, hematoma resolution, and neurological deterioration after hematoma progression were evaluated and compared with trial-eligible counterparts. Effect sizes were adjusted for demographic, clinical, and radiological features using multivariable regression.
RESULTS: Of 150 standalone MMAE procedures, 92 (61%) were performed in "trial-ineligible" cases: 41% with CSDH thickness >15 mm, 21% with midline shift ≥5 mm, and 38% with both. The surgical rescue rate was 7.6% in the trial-ineligible cohort. Over a median follow-up of 62.5 days, 88.9% cases achieved satisfactory hematoma resolution (≥50% in thickness); 76% had satisfactory resolution at 90-day follow-up. Antithrombotic resumption was a risk factor for surgical rescue (adjusted odds ratio 9.64 [95% CI, 1.33-69.74]; P = .02). Surgical rescue and hematoma resolution did not significantly differ between trial-ineligible and trial-eligible cohorts ( P = .87 for surgical rescue rate and P = .85 for hematoma resolution rate).
CONCLUSION: This study emphasizes the considerable prevalence of potentially "trial-ineligible" patients with CSDHs because of large size that may still benefit from standalone MMAE.
METHODS: A prospectively maintained database was reviewed to identify trial-ineligible CSDHs undergoing standalone MMAE. Surgical rescue rate, hematoma resolution, and neurological deterioration after hematoma progression were evaluated and compared with trial-eligible counterparts. Effect sizes were adjusted for demographic, clinical, and radiological features using multivariable regression.
RESULTS: Of 150 standalone MMAE procedures, 92 (61%) were performed in "trial-ineligible" cases: 41% with CSDH thickness >15 mm, 21% with midline shift ≥5 mm, and 38% with both. The surgical rescue rate was 7.6% in the trial-ineligible cohort. Over a median follow-up of 62.5 days, 88.9% cases achieved satisfactory hematoma resolution (≥50% in thickness); 76% had satisfactory resolution at 90-day follow-up. Antithrombotic resumption was a risk factor for surgical rescue (adjusted odds ratio 9.64 [95% CI, 1.33-69.74]; P = .02). Surgical rescue and hematoma resolution did not significantly differ between trial-ineligible and trial-eligible cohorts ( P = .87 for surgical rescue rate and P = .85 for hematoma resolution rate).
CONCLUSION: This study emphasizes the considerable prevalence of potentially "trial-ineligible" patients with CSDHs because of large size that may still benefit from standalone MMAE.