中脑膜动脉栓塞治疗 "不符合试验条件 "的慢性硬膜下血肿。

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Neurosurgery Pub Date : 2024-08-08 DOI:10.1227/neu.0000000000003136
Li Ma, Samer S Hoz, Mohamed F Doheim, Ali Fadhil, Abdullah Sultany, Alhamza R Al-Bayati, Raul G Nogueira, Michael J Lang, Bradley A Gross
{"title":"中脑膜动脉栓塞治疗 \"不符合试验条件 \"的慢性硬膜下血肿。","authors":"Li Ma, Samer S Hoz, Mohamed F Doheim, Ali Fadhil, Abdullah Sultany, Alhamza R Al-Bayati, Raul G Nogueira, Michael J Lang, Bradley A Gross","doi":"10.1227/neu.0000000000003136","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study emphasizes the considerable prevalence of potentially \"trial-ineligible\" patients with CSDHs because of large size that may still benefit from standalone MMAE.</p>","PeriodicalId":19276,"journal":{"name":"Neurosurgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Middle Meningeal Artery Embolization for \\\"Trial-Ineligible\\\" Chronic Subdural Hematomas.\",\"authors\":\"Li Ma, Samer S Hoz, Mohamed F Doheim, Ali Fadhil, Abdullah Sultany, Alhamza R Al-Bayati, Raul G Nogueira, Michael J Lang, Bradley A Gross\",\"doi\":\"10.1227/neu.0000000000003136\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study emphasizes the considerable prevalence of potentially \\\"trial-ineligible\\\" patients with CSDHs because of large size that may still benefit from standalone MMAE.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19276,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurosurgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurosurgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0000000000003136\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0000000000003136","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:脑膜中动脉栓塞术(MMAE)治疗慢性硬膜下血肿(CSDH)的疗效最近已在一系列临床试验中得到证实。但 "不符合试验条件 "的患者是否能从 MMAE 中获益仍是未知数。因此,我们试图探索 MMAE 对神经系统稳定(修改后的 Rankin 量表≤3)、因体积较大而 "不符合试验条件 "的 CSDH 患者的潜在益处:方法:方法:对前瞻性维护的数据库进行审查,以确定接受独立 MMAE 的不符合试验条件的 CSDH。评估了手术抢救率、血肿消退率以及血肿进展后的神经功能恶化情况,并与符合试验条件的患者进行了比较。采用多变量回归法对人口统计学、临床和放射学特征的影响大小进行了调整:在150例独立MMAE手术中,92例(61%)是在 "符合试验条件 "的病例中进行的:41%的病例CSDH厚度大于15毫米,21%的病例中线移位≥5毫米,38%的病例两者都有。在不符合试验条件的病例中,手术抢救率为 7.6%。在中位 62.5 天的随访中,88.9% 的病例血肿得到了满意的消退(厚度≥50%);76% 的病例在 90 天的随访中血肿得到了满意的消退。抗血栓恢复是手术抢救的一个风险因素(调整后的几率比 9.64 [95% CI, 1.33-69.74];P = .02)。手术抢救率和血肿消退率在不符合试验条件的组群和符合试验条件的组群之间没有明显差异(手术抢救率P = .87,血肿消退率P = .85):本研究强调,由于 CSDHs 患者体型较大,可能 "不符合试验条件 "的患者相当普遍,他们仍可从独立的 MMAE 中获益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Middle Meningeal Artery Embolization for "Trial-Ineligible" Chronic Subdural Hematomas.

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Neurosurgery
Neurosurgery 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
6.20%
发文量
898
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: Neurosurgery, the official journal of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons, publishes research on clinical and experimental neurosurgery covering the very latest developments in science, technology, and medicine. For professionals aware of the rapid pace of developments in the field, this journal is nothing short of indispensable as the most complete window on the contemporary field of neurosurgery. Neurosurgery is the fastest-growing journal in the field, with a worldwide reputation for reliable coverage delivered with a fresh and dynamic outlook.
期刊最新文献
Long-Term Outcomes After Cyberknife Radiosurgery for Nonfunctioning Pituitary Adenomas. Outcomes of Traditional Dual Growing Rods With Apical Control Techniques for the Treatment of Early-Onset Scoliosis: Comparison With Patients Treated With Traditional Dual Growing Rods Only With a Minimum 2-Year Follow-up After Graduation. Understanding the Importance of Blood-Brain Barrier Alterations in Brain Arteriovenous Malformations and Implications for Treatment: A Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced-MRI-Based Prospective Study. Pathophysiology and Prevention of Ventriculostomy-Related Infections: A Review. Is It Justified to Sacrifice the Pituitary Stalk During Craniopharyngioma Surgery? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
×
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