栓塞脑膜中动脉(EMMA)治疗非急性硬膜下血肿:来自近期随机试验和荟萃分析的见解。

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 Medicine
Jai Shankar
{"title":"栓塞脑膜中动脉(EMMA)治疗非急性硬膜下血肿:来自近期随机试验和荟萃分析的见解。","authors":"Jai Shankar","doi":"10.1177/15910199251318408","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Embolization of the middle meningeal artery (EMMA) has emerged as a promising treatment for non-acute subdural hematoma (NASDH), either as an adjunct to surgical drainage or as a primary intervention in patients not undergoing surgery. Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have investigated the efficacy of EMMA using dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)-based agents like ONYX and SQUID. The EMBOLISE trial demonstrated a significant reduction in hematoma recurrence with adjunctive EMMA, while the STEM trial showed similar benefits at 180 days. Conversely, the MAGIC MT trial found no significant difference in recurrence rates with EMMA. A meta-analysis of these trials confirmed EMMA's safety, with no significant increase in serious adverse events. The analysis indicated a modest overall benefit in reducing NASDH recurrence (risk difference -0.09, <i>P</i> = 0.02), though results were largely driven by the STEM trial. The benefit of adjunctive EMMA was less clear, with no significant effect found. Primary EMMA showed marginal benefit but with considerable variability. Factors such as primary outcome, trial design, patient demographics, and surgical biases complicate the interpretation of these findings. While the safety of EMMA is supported, its clinical efficacy remains inconclusive. Further trials, including patient-level meta-analyses, are needed to refine the role of EMMA in NASDH management and address existing gaps in the literature.</p>","PeriodicalId":14380,"journal":{"name":"Interventional Neuroradiology","volume":" ","pages":"15910199251318408"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11791965/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Embolization of middle meningeal artery (EMMA) for non-acute subdural hematoma: Insight from recent randomized trials and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Jai Shankar\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15910199251318408\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Embolization of the middle meningeal artery (EMMA) has emerged as a promising treatment for non-acute subdural hematoma (NASDH), either as an adjunct to surgical drainage or as a primary intervention in patients not undergoing surgery. Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have investigated the efficacy of EMMA using dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)-based agents like ONYX and SQUID. The EMBOLISE trial demonstrated a significant reduction in hematoma recurrence with adjunctive EMMA, while the STEM trial showed similar benefits at 180 days. Conversely, the MAGIC MT trial found no significant difference in recurrence rates with EMMA. A meta-analysis of these trials confirmed EMMA's safety, with no significant increase in serious adverse events. The analysis indicated a modest overall benefit in reducing NASDH recurrence (risk difference -0.09, <i>P</i> = 0.02), though results were largely driven by the STEM trial. The benefit of adjunctive EMMA was less clear, with no significant effect found. Primary EMMA showed marginal benefit but with considerable variability. Factors such as primary outcome, trial design, patient demographics, and surgical biases complicate the interpretation of these findings. While the safety of EMMA is supported, its clinical efficacy remains inconclusive. Further trials, including patient-level meta-analyses, are needed to refine the role of EMMA in NASDH management and address existing gaps in the literature.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14380,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Interventional Neuroradiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"15910199251318408\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11791965/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Interventional Neuroradiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15910199251318408\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interventional Neuroradiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15910199251318408","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

脑膜中动脉栓塞(EMMA)已成为治疗非急性硬膜下血肿(NASDH)的一种有希望的治疗方法,无论是作为手术引流的辅助手段,还是作为未接受手术的患者的主要干预措施。最近的随机对照试验(rct)研究了使用二甲亚砜(DMSO)为基础的药物如ONYX和SQUID对EMMA的疗效。栓塞试验表明,辅助EMMA可显著减少血肿复发,而STEM试验在180天时也显示出类似的效果。相反,MAGIC MT试验发现EMMA的复发率没有显著差异。这些试验的荟萃分析证实了EMMA的安全性,严重不良事件没有显著增加。分析表明,减少NASDH复发率总体上有一定的益处(风险差异-0.09,P = 0.02),尽管结果主要是由STEM试验推动的。辅助EMMA的益处不太清楚,没有发现明显的效果。原发性EMMA表现出边际效益,但具有相当大的可变性。主要结果、试验设计、患者人口统计学和手术偏差等因素使这些发现的解释复杂化。虽然支持EMMA的安全性,但其临床疗效尚无定论。需要进一步的试验,包括患者水平的荟萃分析,来完善EMMA在NASDH管理中的作用,并解决文献中的现有空白。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Embolization of middle meningeal artery (EMMA) for non-acute subdural hematoma: Insight from recent randomized trials and meta-analysis.

Embolization of the middle meningeal artery (EMMA) has emerged as a promising treatment for non-acute subdural hematoma (NASDH), either as an adjunct to surgical drainage or as a primary intervention in patients not undergoing surgery. Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have investigated the efficacy of EMMA using dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)-based agents like ONYX and SQUID. The EMBOLISE trial demonstrated a significant reduction in hematoma recurrence with adjunctive EMMA, while the STEM trial showed similar benefits at 180 days. Conversely, the MAGIC MT trial found no significant difference in recurrence rates with EMMA. A meta-analysis of these trials confirmed EMMA's safety, with no significant increase in serious adverse events. The analysis indicated a modest overall benefit in reducing NASDH recurrence (risk difference -0.09, P = 0.02), though results were largely driven by the STEM trial. The benefit of adjunctive EMMA was less clear, with no significant effect found. Primary EMMA showed marginal benefit but with considerable variability. Factors such as primary outcome, trial design, patient demographics, and surgical biases complicate the interpretation of these findings. While the safety of EMMA is supported, its clinical efficacy remains inconclusive. Further trials, including patient-level meta-analyses, are needed to refine the role of EMMA in NASDH management and address existing gaps in the literature.

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
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
11.80%
发文量
192
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Interventional Neuroradiology (INR) is a peer-reviewed clinical practice journal documenting the current state of interventional neuroradiology worldwide. INR publishes original clinical observations, descriptions of new techniques or procedures, case reports, and articles on the ethical and social aspects of related health care. Original research published in INR is related to the practice of interventional neuroradiology...
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信