Spencer Oslin, Wilson Hoyt, Sherwin Tavakol, Hakeem Shakir, Andrew Bauer, Shyian Jen, Christopher Graffeo
{"title":"尼莫地平治疗持续时间是否影响动脉瘤性蛛网膜下腔出血的预后:系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Spencer Oslin, Wilson Hoyt, Sherwin Tavakol, Hakeem Shakir, Andrew Bauer, Shyian Jen, Christopher Graffeo","doi":"10.1007/s10143-025-03672-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) is a neurosurgical emergency with high morbidity and mortality risks. Vasospasm, a severe subacute complication, may be mitigated by nimodipine, a calcium channel blocker. The optimal duration of nimodipine therapy remains uncertain. We sought to evaluate the optimal duration of nimodipine therapy in relation to overall morbidity in aSAH patients through a systematic review and meta-analysis. A PRISMA-compliant systematic review searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library (1/1975-9/2024). Included studies reported nimodipine protocols and standardized outcomes. Data extracted included demographics, nimodipine dosing, duration, and outcomes. The primary outcome was overall morbidity, assessed via extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (eGOS), Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS), or modified Rankin Scale (mRS). The secondary outcome was neuroimaging-validated delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) incidence. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed. Fourteen studies (19 cohorts) included 759 standard-of-care (SOC, 21-day nimodipine) and 781 dose duration reduction (DDR, < 21 days) patients. SOC had a pooled favorable outcome proportion of 0.52 [95% CI: 0.34-0.70], versus 0.74 [95% CI: 0.64-0.83] for DDR (p = 0.03). Subgroup analyses showed significant differences by outcome scale (p < 0.01) and administration route (p = 0.01), with oral DDR linked to better outcomes (p = 0.02). Heterogeneity was significant (I<sup>2</sup> = 95%, p < 0.01). DCI incidence was 0.39 [95% CI: 0.20-0.57] in SOC and 0.31 [95% CI: 0.18-0.44] in DDR (p = 0.50). DDR nimodipine protocols do not increase aSAH morbidity or DCI incidence compared to SOC and may improve outcomes. These findings support individualized treatment durations, especially for patients with adverse effects, though heterogeneity necessitates cautious interpretation.</p>","PeriodicalId":19184,"journal":{"name":"Neurosurgical Review","volume":"48 1","pages":"531"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does duration of nimodipine therapy impact outcome in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Spencer Oslin, Wilson Hoyt, Sherwin Tavakol, Hakeem Shakir, Andrew Bauer, Shyian Jen, Christopher Graffeo\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10143-025-03672-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) is a neurosurgical emergency with high morbidity and mortality risks. Vasospasm, a severe subacute complication, may be mitigated by nimodipine, a calcium channel blocker. The optimal duration of nimodipine therapy remains uncertain. We sought to evaluate the optimal duration of nimodipine therapy in relation to overall morbidity in aSAH patients through a systematic review and meta-analysis. A PRISMA-compliant systematic review searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library (1/1975-9/2024). Included studies reported nimodipine protocols and standardized outcomes. Data extracted included demographics, nimodipine dosing, duration, and outcomes. The primary outcome was overall morbidity, assessed via extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (eGOS), Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS), or modified Rankin Scale (mRS). The secondary outcome was neuroimaging-validated delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) incidence. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed. Fourteen studies (19 cohorts) included 759 standard-of-care (SOC, 21-day nimodipine) and 781 dose duration reduction (DDR, < 21 days) patients. SOC had a pooled favorable outcome proportion of 0.52 [95% CI: 0.34-0.70], versus 0.74 [95% CI: 0.64-0.83] for DDR (p = 0.03). Subgroup analyses showed significant differences by outcome scale (p < 0.01) and administration route (p = 0.01), with oral DDR linked to better outcomes (p = 0.02). Heterogeneity was significant (I<sup>2</sup> = 95%, p < 0.01). DCI incidence was 0.39 [95% CI: 0.20-0.57] in SOC and 0.31 [95% CI: 0.18-0.44] in DDR (p = 0.50). DDR nimodipine protocols do not increase aSAH morbidity or DCI incidence compared to SOC and may improve outcomes. These findings support individualized treatment durations, especially for patients with adverse effects, though heterogeneity necessitates cautious interpretation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19184,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurosurgical Review\",\"volume\":\"48 1\",\"pages\":\"531\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurosurgical Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-025-03672-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurosurgical Review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-025-03672-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
动脉瘤性蛛网膜下腔出血(aSAH)是一种高发病率和死亡率的神经外科急症。血管痉挛是一种严重的亚急性并发症,可由钙通道阻滞剂尼莫地平缓解。尼莫地平治疗的最佳持续时间仍不确定。我们试图通过系统回顾和荟萃分析来评估尼莫地平治疗与aSAH患者总体发病率的最佳持续时间。一篇符合prisma标准的系统综述检索了MEDLINE、EMBASE和Cochrane Library(1975年1月至2024年9月)。纳入的研究报告了尼莫地平方案和标准化结果。提取的数据包括人口统计学、尼莫地平剂量、持续时间和结果。主要结局是总体发病率,通过扩展格拉斯哥结局量表(eGOS)、格拉斯哥结局量表(GOS)或修改的兰金量表(mRS)进行评估。次要终点是经神经影像学证实的延迟性脑缺血(DCI)发生率。进行随机效应荟萃分析。14项研究(19个队列)包括759例标准护理(SOC, 21天尼莫地平)和781例剂量持续时间减少(DDR, 2 = 95%, p
Does duration of nimodipine therapy impact outcome in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) is a neurosurgical emergency with high morbidity and mortality risks. Vasospasm, a severe subacute complication, may be mitigated by nimodipine, a calcium channel blocker. The optimal duration of nimodipine therapy remains uncertain. We sought to evaluate the optimal duration of nimodipine therapy in relation to overall morbidity in aSAH patients through a systematic review and meta-analysis. A PRISMA-compliant systematic review searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library (1/1975-9/2024). Included studies reported nimodipine protocols and standardized outcomes. Data extracted included demographics, nimodipine dosing, duration, and outcomes. The primary outcome was overall morbidity, assessed via extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (eGOS), Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS), or modified Rankin Scale (mRS). The secondary outcome was neuroimaging-validated delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) incidence. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed. Fourteen studies (19 cohorts) included 759 standard-of-care (SOC, 21-day nimodipine) and 781 dose duration reduction (DDR, < 21 days) patients. SOC had a pooled favorable outcome proportion of 0.52 [95% CI: 0.34-0.70], versus 0.74 [95% CI: 0.64-0.83] for DDR (p = 0.03). Subgroup analyses showed significant differences by outcome scale (p < 0.01) and administration route (p = 0.01), with oral DDR linked to better outcomes (p = 0.02). Heterogeneity was significant (I2 = 95%, p < 0.01). DCI incidence was 0.39 [95% CI: 0.20-0.57] in SOC and 0.31 [95% CI: 0.18-0.44] in DDR (p = 0.50). DDR nimodipine protocols do not increase aSAH morbidity or DCI incidence compared to SOC and may improve outcomes. These findings support individualized treatment durations, especially for patients with adverse effects, though heterogeneity necessitates cautious interpretation.
期刊介绍:
The goal of Neurosurgical Review is to provide a forum for comprehensive reviews on current issues in neurosurgery. Each issue contains up to three reviews, reflecting all important aspects of one topic (a disease or a surgical approach). Comments by a panel of experts within the same issue complete the topic. By providing comprehensive coverage of one topic per issue, Neurosurgical Review combines the topicality of professional journals with the indepth treatment of a monograph. Original papers of high quality are also welcome.