Abstract
Background Chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH) is characterized by the collection of blood beneath the dura mater. Traditional treatments involve surgical drainage of the hematoma, but recurrence rates can be high. A highly vascularized neo-membrane irrigated by the middle meningeal artery (MMA) may be involved in CSDH re-accumulation.
Objective We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that compared the efficacy and safety of MMA embolization to conventional treatment alone for CSDH.
Material and Methods A systematic search of PubMed, Embase Ovid, and ClinicalTrials.gov identified observational and randomized clinical studies comparing MMA embolization to conventional treatment for chronic subdural hematoma. The efficacy outcomes were hematoma recurrence and good functional outcome (as defined by a modified Rankin Scale score (mRS) of 0-2). Safety outcomes were the rate of major complication and mortality. Heterogeneity among studies were evaluated using the I2 statistic. Analyses were conducted using Cochrane Review Manager software, with risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) presented for key outcomes. Absolute risk reduction (ARR, 95% CI) 1000 patients were also calculated using GRADEpro software.
Results The analysis included data from 13 studies (4 RCTs and 9 observational studies) with a total number of 2960 patients (35.3% in the MMA group and 64.7% in the conventional treatment group). Compared to conventional treatment, MMA embolization decreased risk of hematoma recurrence by 60% (13 studies, RR=0.40, 95% CI 0.25-0.63; I2=50%), for an absolute effect of 119 fewer events/1000 patients (95% CI 70-149), with similar risk of major complications (9 studies, RR=0.82, 95% CI=0.54-1.25) and mortality risk (13 studies, RR=0.90, 95% CI=0.54-1.51). In subgroup analyses by study type, pooled results from RCTs showed similar direction effects as those from observational studies for both efficacy and safety outcomes.
Conclusion MMA embolization in CSDH management is a safe and effective approach for CSDH.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
PROSPERO, trial number IDCRD42024515860
Funding Statement
n/a
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data referred in the manuscript has reference associated with it.
