Middle Meningeal Artery Embolization for Nonacute Subdural Hematoma: A Meta-Analysis of Large Randomized Controlled Trials.

Huanwen Chen, Matthew K McIntyre, Peter Kan, Dheeraj Gandhi, Marco Colasurdo
{"title":"Middle Meningeal Artery Embolization for Nonacute Subdural Hematoma: A Meta-Analysis of Large Randomized Controlled Trials.","authors":"Huanwen Chen, Matthew K McIntyre, Peter Kan, Dheeraj Gandhi, Marco Colasurdo","doi":"10.3174/ajnr.A8781","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Middle meningeal artery embolization (MMAE) has emerged as a novel treatment for non-acute subdural hematoma (SDH), particularly for reducing the risk of SDH recurrence. Recently, 5 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of MMAE as an adjunct to conventional management (surgical or observant) have concluded their investigation and reported their outcomes.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Our goal was to synthesize trial results to provide more definitive guidance on the role of MMAE in the management of non-acute SDH.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>The MEDLINE database from inception up to November 23, 2024 was used. English-language clinical articles reporting large randomized controlled trials (<i>n</i> = 100 or more) investigating the efficacy and safety of MMAE for patients with non-acute subdural hematoma were identified.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>Five trials were identified-EMBOLISE, STEM, MAGIC-MT, EMPROTECT, and MEMBRANE.</p><p><strong>Data analysis: </strong>The primary efficacy end point was SDH treatment failure (broadly defined as SDH recurrence or requirement of surgical rescue) within 3 to 6 months. Safety end points include death and stroke.</p><p><strong>Data synthesis: </strong>There was significant heterogeneity in terms of patient populations as well as reported outcomes. Overall, MMAE was associated with significantly lower odds of SDH treatment failure (OR 0.51 [95% CI 0.39-0.67], <i>P</i> < .001), with minimal inter study heterogeneity. Compared with conventional management, MMAE was not significantly associated with different odds of death (OR 1.03 [95% CI 0.36-2.99], <i>P</i> = .95) or stroke (OR 1.10 [95% CI 0.36-3.39], <i>P</i> = .86).</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Our meta-analysis is limited by selection bias and high heterogeneity in study design and reported outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study provides high-level evidence that, for patients with non-acute SDH, MMAE is a safe and effective adjunct to conventional management for preventing treatment failure.</p>","PeriodicalId":93863,"journal":{"name":"AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A8781","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Middle meningeal artery embolization (MMAE) has emerged as a novel treatment for non-acute subdural hematoma (SDH), particularly for reducing the risk of SDH recurrence. Recently, 5 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of MMAE as an adjunct to conventional management (surgical or observant) have concluded their investigation and reported their outcomes.

Purpose: Our goal was to synthesize trial results to provide more definitive guidance on the role of MMAE in the management of non-acute SDH.

Data sources: The MEDLINE database from inception up to November 23, 2024 was used. English-language clinical articles reporting large randomized controlled trials (n = 100 or more) investigating the efficacy and safety of MMAE for patients with non-acute subdural hematoma were identified.

Study selection: Five trials were identified-EMBOLISE, STEM, MAGIC-MT, EMPROTECT, and MEMBRANE.

Data analysis: The primary efficacy end point was SDH treatment failure (broadly defined as SDH recurrence or requirement of surgical rescue) within 3 to 6 months. Safety end points include death and stroke.

Data synthesis: There was significant heterogeneity in terms of patient populations as well as reported outcomes. Overall, MMAE was associated with significantly lower odds of SDH treatment failure (OR 0.51 [95% CI 0.39-0.67], P < .001), with minimal inter study heterogeneity. Compared with conventional management, MMAE was not significantly associated with different odds of death (OR 1.03 [95% CI 0.36-2.99], P = .95) or stroke (OR 1.10 [95% CI 0.36-3.39], P = .86).

Limitations: Our meta-analysis is limited by selection bias and high heterogeneity in study design and reported outcomes.

Conclusions: This study provides high-level evidence that, for patients with non-acute SDH, MMAE is a safe and effective adjunct to conventional management for preventing treatment failure.

脑膜中动脉栓塞治疗非急性硬膜下血肿:大型随机对照试验的荟萃分析。
背景:脑膜中动脉栓塞术(MMAE)已成为一种治疗非急性硬膜下血肿(SDH)的新方法,特别是可以降低SDH复发的风险。最近,五项MMAE作为常规治疗(手术或观察)辅助的随机对照试验(RCT)已经结束了他们的调查并报告了他们的结果。目的:综合试验结果,为MMAE在非急性SDH治疗中的作用提供更明确的指导。数据来源:MEDLINE数据库从成立到2024年11月23日。英文临床文章报道了大型随机对照试验(n=100或更多),研究了MMAE对非急性硬膜下血肿患者的疗效和安全性。研究选择:确定了五个试验- EMBOLISE, STEM, MAGIC-MT, EMPROTECT和MEMBRANE。资料分析:主要疗效终点为3 ~ 6个月内SDH治疗失败(广义定义为SDH复发或需要手术抢救)。安全终点包括死亡和中风。数据综合:在患者群体和报告的结果方面存在显著的异质性。总的来说,MMAE与SDH治疗失败的几率显著降低相关(OR 0.51 [95%CI 0.39至0.67])。局限性:我们的荟萃分析受到选择偏倚和研究设计和报告结果的高度异质性的限制。结论:本研究提供了高水平的证据,表明对于非急性SDH患者,MMAE是安全有效的,可作为预防治疗失败的常规管理的辅助手段。缩写:SDH =硬膜下血肿;脑膜中动脉栓塞术;随机对照试验。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信