ArticleNeurosurgical review2025
Determining the optimal hematoma volume-based thresholds for surgical and medical strategies in basal ganglia hemorrhage.
Article in Neurosurgical review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- AI-assisted versus fully automated volumetry for hemorrhage quantification in spontaneous ICH with ventricular extension: A multi-center study.European journal of radiology open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hematoma volume is a significant concern in basal ganglia hemorrhage, with no clear cutoff to guide the choice between conservative and surgical management, particularly for larger hematomas where the optimal approach remains controversial. This study aimed to determine the maximum hematoma volume suitable for conservative treatment and the volume that necessitates surgical intervention in patients with basal ganglia hemorrhage. A total of 387 cases of basal ganglia hemorrhage from 2019 to 2021 were analyzed, evaluating patient demographics, medical history, and initial CT brain scans to assess hematoma volume. Outcomes of medical and surgical treatments were compared using multivariate logistic and Cox regression analysis. For patients treated with medical management alone, mortality rates did not differ significantly between hematoma volumes of 10-39.9 mL and those under 10 mL. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis identified a cutoff volume of 45.3 mL, with a sensitivity of 80.82% and specificity of 91.67% for predicting survival. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed a reduced mortality hazard ratio (0.17) with surgical intervention for hematomas exceeding 45.3 mL. However, surgical treatment for volumes under 30 mL was associated with higher mortality compared to medical management. Surgical intervention showed a clear survival benefit for hematoma volumes of at least 60 mL, while conservative treatment remained appropriate for volumes up to 45.3 mL. For volumes between 45.3 mL and 59.9 mL, the decision to operate should be guided by the surgeon's judgment and patient-specific factors such as comorbidities, brain atrophy. In conclusion, conservative management is effective for hematomas up to 45.3 mL, while surgical intervention is absolutely indicated for volumes of 60 mL or more. These findings provide valuable guidance for optimizing treatment strategies in basal ganglia hemorrhage.
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.