Complications of Middle Meningeal Artery Embolization for Chronic Subdural Hematoma: A Systematic Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronic subdural hematoma (cSDH) is a common condition, especially in the older population, and causes considerable morbidity. Recently, middle meningeal artery embolization (MMAE) has shown promise as a minimally invasive intervention for cSDH by disrupting the flow to the hematoma neomembranes and thus reducing recurrence. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the literature using PubMed/Medline and Google Scholar to identify studies reporting on MMAE for cSDH over the past 30 years. After screening 4103 articles and reviewing 600 full-text studies, 176 studies were selected, including case reports, case series, retrospective and prospective studies and randomized controlled trials. Patient demographics, embolic agents used, frequency, type and severity of complications, hematoma recurrence and need for repeat surgery were extracted from the included studies. RESULTS: Our analysis included 9780 patients (75.9% male), with mean/median ages ranging from 62.1 to 82.5 years. MMAE-related complications were reported in approximately 3%. Procedure-related neurological complications were the most frequent, followed by systemic complications, access site, non-procedure-related neurological complications, procedure-linked vascular complications specific to MMA and miscellaneous complications. Hematoma recurrence was reported in 6%, and repeat or rescue surgery was necessary in 6.1%. These results are consistent with major clinical trials evaluating MMAE safety and efficacy in cSDH. CONCLUSION: Based on current published literature, MMAE appears to be an effective and overall safe treatment option for cSDH. Complications, although infrequent, can occur, and some of these are disabling. Meticulous pre-procedural planning and imaging are essential to reduce the risk of complications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".