MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409954776 · doi:10.1177/15910199251328563

The effect of pre-treatment hematoma size and unilateral vs bilateral MMA embolization on volume reduction in the treatment of chronic subdural hematomas: A retrospective cohort study

2025· article· en· W4409954776 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Falzon, Ahmed Abdelghafar, Eef J. Hendriks, Hugo Andrade-Barazarte, Alex Kostynskyy, Alexandre Boutet, Ze'ev Itsekson Hayosh, Pascal J. Mosimann

Bibliographic record

VenueInterventional Neuroradiology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurosurgical Procedures and Complications
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHematomaChronic subdural hematomaSurgeryRadiological weaponMidline shiftConfidence intervalRetrospective cohort studyCohortRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and purpose Despite a rapidly growing body of literature supporting the treatment of chronic subdural hematoma (cSDH) with middle meningeal artery embolization (MMAE), real-life data is still scarce. This study aimed to evaluate MMAE radiological and clinical outcomes, based on radiological characteristics. Materials and Methods Fifty-two cSDH patients, treated by MMAE as a post-CSDH evacuation therapy in a single tertiary center, were included. Radiological outcome was evaluated with cSDH thickness/volume difference at routine follow-up compared to pre-MMAE CT head imaging. The cohort was divided into groups pertaining to cSDH laterality (bilateral and unilateral cSDH) and pre-MMAE hematoma thickness (>15 mm and ≤15 mm) for analysis. Patients who underwent evacuation after MMAE were not included in the analysis to eliminate bias of surgical effect on hematoma progression. Results Thirty patients had bilateral, and 22 patients had unilateral cSDH treated with bilateral and unilateral MMAE respectively. Twenty-nine patients had >15 mm pre-MMAE hematoma thickness, and 23 had ≤15 mm pre-MMAE hematoma thickness. Mean cSDH volume was lower at all follow-up intervals when compared to baseline and was reduced by a factor of 10 at the 3–6-month interval. The mean cSDH thickness was significantly lower at all three follow-up intervals when comparing each group (bilateral and unilateral MMAE) (pre-treatment hematoma thickness >15 mm and ≤15 mm). Larger hematomas with a thickness of >15 mm had a significantly greater reduction in mean cSDH volume interval follow-up than hematomas measuring ≤15 mm (1–3 months—63 mm 3 , 40.6–85.69, P < .001). Unilateral cSDH and MMAE demonstrated greater cSDH volume reduction compared to bilateral cSDH and MMAE at 1–3 months (42, 15.2–68.8, .001) and 3-6 months (33.7, 5.2-72.7, .043). No procedure-related major complications or deaths or recurrences were observed. Conclusions Adjunctive MMAE after surgical evacuation appears safe and effective. MMAE is particularly effective for larger pre-treatment hematomas >15 mm (compared to ≤15 mm) and for unilateral cSDH and MMAE (compared to bilateral cSDH and MMAE).

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInterventional NeuroradiologySame topicNeurosurgical Procedures and ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207