Active Versus Passive Drainage Systems for Subdural Hematomas: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Operative Neurosurgery Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-05 DOI:10.1227/ons.0000000000001252
Silvio Porto Junior, Davi Amorim Meira, Beatriz Lopes Bernardo da Cunha, Jefferson Heber Marques Fontes, Hugo Nunes Pustilnik, Gabriel Souza Medrado Nunes, Gabriel Araujo Cerqueira, Matheus Gomes da Silva da Paz, Tancredo Alcântara, Jules Carlos Dourado, Leonardo Miranda de Avelar
{"title":"Active Versus Passive Drainage Systems for Subdural Hematomas: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Silvio Porto Junior, Davi Amorim Meira, Beatriz Lopes Bernardo da Cunha, Jefferson Heber Marques Fontes, Hugo Nunes Pustilnik, Gabriel Souza Medrado Nunes, Gabriel Araujo Cerqueira, Matheus Gomes da Silva da Paz, Tancredo Alcântara, Jules Carlos Dourado, Leonardo Miranda de Avelar","doi":"10.1227/ons.0000000000001252","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH) management involves various surgical techniques, with drainage systems playing a pivotal role. While passive drainage (PD) and active drainage (AD) are both used, their efficacy remains contentious. Some studies favor PD for lower recurrence rates, while others suggest AD superiority. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to address this controversy, aiming to provide clarity on optimal drainage modalities post-CSDH evacuation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis followed preferred reporting items for systematic reviews guidelines, searching PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science until February 2024. Inclusion criteria focused on studies comparing active vs PD for subdural hematomas. Data extraction involved independent researchers, and statistical analysis was conducted using R software. The assessment of risk of bias was performed using the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions framework and the Risk Of Bias 2 tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In this meta-analysis, involving 1949 patients with AD and 1346 with PD, no significant differences were observed in recurrence rates between the active (13.6%) and passive (16.4%) drainage groups (risk ratio [RR] = 0.87; 95% CI: 0.58-1.31). Similarly, for complications, infection, hemorrhage, and mortality, no significant disparities were found between the 2 drainage modalities. Complication rates were 7.5% for active and 12.6% for PD (RR = 0.74; 95% CI: 0.36-1.52). Infection rates were available for 635 patients of the active group, counting for 2% and 2.6%, respectively (RR = 0.98; 95% CI: 0.24-4.01). Hemorrhage rates were also available for 635 patients of the active group, counting for 1.1% and 2.2%, respectively (RR = 0.44; 95% CI: 0.11-1.81). Mortality rates were 2.7% and 2.5%, respectively (RR = 0.94; 95% CI: 0.61-1.46).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study found no significant difference between passive and AD for managing complications, recurrence, infection, hemorrhage, or mortality in CSDH cases. Further large-scale randomized trials are needed for clarity.</p>","PeriodicalId":54254,"journal":{"name":"Operative Neurosurgery","volume":" ","pages":"29-37"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Operative Neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1227/ons.0000000000001252","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: Chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH) management involves various surgical techniques, with drainage systems playing a pivotal role. While passive drainage (PD) and active drainage (AD) are both used, their efficacy remains contentious. Some studies favor PD for lower recurrence rates, while others suggest AD superiority. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to address this controversy, aiming to provide clarity on optimal drainage modalities post-CSDH evacuation.

Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis followed preferred reporting items for systematic reviews guidelines, searching PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science until February 2024. Inclusion criteria focused on studies comparing active vs PD for subdural hematomas. Data extraction involved independent researchers, and statistical analysis was conducted using R software. The assessment of risk of bias was performed using the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions framework and the Risk Of Bias 2 tool.

Results: In this meta-analysis, involving 1949 patients with AD and 1346 with PD, no significant differences were observed in recurrence rates between the active (13.6%) and passive (16.4%) drainage groups (risk ratio [RR] = 0.87; 95% CI: 0.58-1.31). Similarly, for complications, infection, hemorrhage, and mortality, no significant disparities were found between the 2 drainage modalities. Complication rates were 7.5% for active and 12.6% for PD (RR = 0.74; 95% CI: 0.36-1.52). Infection rates were available for 635 patients of the active group, counting for 2% and 2.6%, respectively (RR = 0.98; 95% CI: 0.24-4.01). Hemorrhage rates were also available for 635 patients of the active group, counting for 1.1% and 2.2%, respectively (RR = 0.44; 95% CI: 0.11-1.81). Mortality rates were 2.7% and 2.5%, respectively (RR = 0.94; 95% CI: 0.61-1.46).

Conclusion: Our study found no significant difference between passive and AD for managing complications, recurrence, infection, hemorrhage, or mortality in CSDH cases. Further large-scale randomized trials are needed for clarity.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
硬膜下血肿的主动引流系统与被动引流系统:系统综述与元分析》。
背景和目的:慢性硬膜下血肿(CSDH)的治疗涉及多种外科技术,其中引流系统起着关键作用。虽然被动引流(PD)和主动引流(AD)都在使用,但它们的疗效仍存在争议。一些研究认为被动引流的复发率较低,而另一些研究则认为主动引流更有优势。为了解决这一争议,我们进行了一项系统回顾和荟萃分析,旨在明确 CSDH 抽吸术后的最佳引流方式:本系统综述和荟萃分析遵循系统综述指南的首选报告项目,检索了 PubMed、Embase 和 Web of Science,直至 2024 年 2 月。纳入标准主要是比较硬膜下血肿主动治疗与PD治疗的研究。独立研究人员参与了数据提取,并使用 R 软件进行了统计分析。使用非随机干预研究中的偏倚风险框架和偏倚风险2工具对偏倚风险进行了评估:这项荟萃分析涉及1949名AD患者和1346名PD患者,结果显示,主动引流组(13.6%)和被动引流组(16.4%)的复发率无明显差异(风险比[RR] = 0.87;95% CI:0.58-1.31)。同样,在并发症、感染、出血和死亡率方面,两种引流方式也没有发现明显差异。主动引流的并发症发生率为 7.5%,主动引流的并发症发生率为 12.6%(RR = 0.74;95% CI:0.36-1.52)。主动组有 635 名患者感染,感染率分别为 2% 和 2.6%(RR = 0.98;95% CI:0.24-4.01)。积极治疗组的 635 名患者的出血率分别为 1.1%和 2.2%(RR = 0.44;95% CI:0.11-1.81)。死亡率分别为2.7%和2.5%(RR=0.94;95% CI:0.61-1.46):我们的研究发现,在处理 CSDH 病例的并发症、复发、感染、出血或死亡率方面,被动和 AD 没有明显差异。要明确这一点,还需要进一步开展大规模随机试验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Operative Neurosurgery
Operative Neurosurgery Medicine-Neurology (clinical)
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
13.00%
发文量
530
期刊介绍: Operative Neurosurgery is a bi-monthly, unique publication focusing exclusively on surgical technique and devices, providing practical, skill-enhancing guidance to its readers. Complementing the clinical and research studies published in Neurosurgery, Operative Neurosurgery brings the reader technical material that highlights operative procedures, anatomy, instrumentation, devices, and technology. Operative Neurosurgery is the practical resource for cutting-edge material that brings the surgeon the most up to date literature on operative practice and technique
期刊最新文献
Letter: The Role of Watertight Dural Closure in Supratentorial Craniotomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. In Reply: The Role of Watertight Dural Closure in Supratentorial Craniotomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Treatment of Recurrent, Twice Coiled, Previously Ruptured Anterior Inferior Cerebellar Artery-Posterior Inferior Cerebellar Artery Aneurysm With Excision and End-to-End Anastomosis: 2-Dimensional Operative Video. Microsurgical Clip Ligation of a Large Anterior Communicating Artery Aneurysm Previously Treated With Woven Endobridge Device: 2-Dimensional Operative Video. A Cadaveric Feasibility Study of the Biportal Endoscopic Transfrontal Sinus Approach: A Minimally Invasive Approach to the Anterior Cranial Fossa.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1