MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405142355 · doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102999

Surgical interventions for spontaneous supratentorial intracerebral haemorrhage: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4405142355 on OpenAlexaff
Jiayidaer Huan, Minghong Yao, Yu Ma, Fan Mei, Yanmei Liu, Lu Ma, Xiaochao Luo, Jiali Liu, Jianguo Xu, Chao You, Hunong Xiang, Kang Zou, Xiao Liang, Xin Hu, Ling Li, Xin Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueEClinicalMedicine · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityImpact
FundersWest China Hospital, Sichuan UniversityNational Science Fund for Distinguished Young ScholarsSichuan UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisPsychological interventionIntensive care medicinePathologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Surgical interventions for spontaneous supratentorial intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) include conventional craniotomy (CC), decompressive craniectomy (DC), and minimally invasive surgery (MIS), with the latter encompassing endoscopic surgery (ES) and minimally invasive puncture surgery (MIPS). However, the superiority of surgery over conservative medical treatment (CMT) and the comparative benefits of different surgical procedures remain unclear. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of various surgical interventions for treating ICH. Methods In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to June 16, 2024. Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing surgery (i.e., CC, ES, MIPS, or DC) with CMT or comparing different types of surgeries in patients with spontaneous supratentorial ICH. Paired reviewers independently screened citations, assessed the risk of bias of included trials, and extracted data. Primary outcomes were good functional outcome and mortality at 6 months. Secondary outcomes were good functional outcome and mortality at different follow-up times, complications (rebleeding, brain infection, pulmonary infection), and hematoma evacuation rate. The frequentist pairwise and network meta-analysis (NMA) were performed. The GRADE approach was used to evaluate the certainty of evidence. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42024518961. Findings Of the 8573 total records identified by our searches, 31 studies (6448 patients) were eligible for the systematic review and network analysis. Compared with CMT, moderate certainty evidence showed that surgery improved good functional outcome (risk ratio [RR] 1.31, 95% CI 1.13–1.52; risk difference [RD] 9.1%, 95% CI 3.8 to 15.3; I 2 = 36%) and reduced mortality (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.71–0.95; RD −5.1%, 95% CI −8.2 to −1.4; I 2 = 14%). Moderate certainty evidence from NMA suggested that compared with CMT, both ES (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.18–1.93; RD 9.4%, 95% CI 3.3–17.1) and MIPS (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.24–1.76; RD 15.7%, 95% CI 7.9–24.9) improved good functional outcome at 6 months, and both ES (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.52–0.85; RD −17.0%, 95% CI −24.0 to −7.5) and CC (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.60–0.94; RD −6.3%, 95% CI −10.1 to −1.5) reduced mortality at 6 months, whereas MIPS and DC showed a trend, although not statistically significant, towards a reduction in mortality. ES and MIPS also reduced pulmonary infection risk (ES RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.23–0.69; MIPS RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.20–0.60; RD −5.3%, 95% CI −6.6 to −3.3). ES showed higher hematoma evacuation than CC (MD: 7.03, 95% CI: 3.42–10.65; I 2 = 94%). No difference in rebleeding or brain infection was found between CC and MIS. Interpretation Current moderate certainty evidence suggested that surgical intervention of spontaneous supratentorial ICH, may be associated with improved functional outcomes and a reduced risk of death at 6 months. The advantages of surgical haematoma removal are particularly pronounced when MIS including ES and MIPS are employed. ES could improve functional outcomes, reduce the risk of mortality and pulmonary infection, and have a high hematoma evacuation rate, suggesting that it might be an optimal surgical treatment. Funding National Natural Science Foundation of China, National Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars, Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Public Welfare Research Institutes, and 1·3·5 project for disciplines of excellence, West China Hospital, Sichuan University.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.031
Bibliometrics0.0090.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.263
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEClinicalMedicineSame topicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage ResearchFrench-language works237,207