ArticleBrain and behavior2024
Additional treatment after primary conservative treatment in patients with chronic subdural hematoma-A retrospective study.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Additional treatment after primary conservative treatment in patients with chronic subdural hematoma-A retrospective study.Brain and behavior · 2024Article
- Multidisciplinary consensus-based statement on the current role of middle meningeal artery embolization (MMAE) in chronic SubDural hematoma (cSDH).Brain & spine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveChronic subdural hematoma (CSDH) is a common neurological condition and is typically treated with burr hole craniostomy. Nevertheless, conservative treatment may lead to spontaneous hematoma resolution in some patients. This study aims to describe the characteristics of patients who were treated conservatively without the eventual need for additional treatment.
methodsData were retrospectively collected from patients who were primarily treated conservatively in three hospitals in the Netherlands from 2008 to 2018. The Primary outcome was the nonnecessity of additional treatment within 3 months after the initial CSDH diagnosis. We used univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses to identify factors associated with not receiving additional treatment.
resultsIn this study, 83 patients were included and 61 patients (73%) did not receive additional treatment within 3 months. Upon first presentation, the patients had a Markwalder Grading Scale score (MGS) of 0 (n = 5, 6%), 1 (n = 43, 52%), and 2 (n = 35, 42%). Additional treatment was less often received by patients with smaller hematoma volumes (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.78 per 10 mL; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64-0.92). Patients using antithrombotic medication also received less additional treatment, but this association was not significant (aOR 2.02; 95% CI 0.61-6.69).
conclusionsThree quarters of the initially conservatively treated CSDH patients do not receive additional management. Typically, these patients have smaller hematoma volumes. Further, prospective research is needed to distinguish which patients require surgical intervention and in whom primary conservative treatment suffices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.