MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321112081 · doi:10.3174/ajnr.a7796

Embolic Agent Choice in Middle Meningeal Artery Embolization as Primary or Adjunct Treatment for Chronic Subdural Hematoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2023· review· en· W4321112081 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Neuroradiology · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurosurgical Procedures and Complications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMiddle meningeal arteryEmbolizationHematomaSurgeryMiddle cerebral arteryRadiologyInternal medicineIschemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>BACKGROUND:</h3> Middle meningeal artery embolization is an emerging treatment option for chronic subdural hematomas. <h3>PURPOSE:</h3> Our aim was to assess outcomes following middle meningeal artery embolization by different techniques, including in comparison with traditional surgical methods. <h3>DATA SOURCES:</h3> We searched the literature databases from inception to March 2022. <h3>DATA SELECTION:</h3> We selected studies reporting outcomes after middle meningeal artery embolization as a primary or adjunctive treatment for chronic subdural hematoma. <h3>DATA ANALYSIS:</h3> We analyzed the risk of recurrence of chronic subdural hematoma, reoperation for recurrence or residual hematoma, complications, and radiologic and clinical outcomes using random effects modeling. Additional analyses were performed on the basis of whether middle meningeal artery embolization was used as the primary or adjunct treatment and by embolic agent type. <h3>DATA SYNTHESIS:</h3> Twenty-two studies were included with 382 patients with middle meningeal artery embolization and 1373 surgical patients. The rate of subdural hematoma recurrence was 4.1%. Fifty (4.2%) patients underwent a reoperation for a recurrent or residual subdural hematoma. Thirty-six (2.6%) experienced postoperative complications. The rates of good radiologic and clinical outcomes were 83.1% and 73.3%, respectively. Middle meningeal artery embolization was significantly associated with decreased odds of subdural hematoma reoperation (OR = 0.48; 95% CI, 23.4–99.1; <i>P</i> = .047) compared with surgery. The lowest rates of subdural hematoma radiologic recurrence, reoperation, and complications were observed among patients receiving embolization with Onyx, whereas good overall clinical outcome occurred most commonly with combined polyvinyl alcohol and coils. <h3>LIMITATIONS:</h3> A limitation was the retrospective design of studies included. <h3>CONCLUSIONS:</h3> Middle meningeal artery embolization is safe and effective, either as a primary or adjunctive treatment. Treatment using Onyx seems to yield lower rates of recurrence, rescue operation, and complications whereas particles and coils produce good overall clinical outcomes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.870
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.202
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it