ArticleScientific reports2025
Analysis of associated factors affecting hematoma evacuation rates in spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage with stereotactic aspiration combined with catheter drainage.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Endoscopic versus catheter-based minimally invasive evacuation of spontaneous supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhage: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2026Pooled it
- Advances in Stereotactic Hematoma Evacuation for Hypertensive Intracerebral Hemorrhage and the Value of Multimodal Monitoring.Cerebrovascular diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Mediation Effects of Hematoma Evacuation Efficacy in Intracerebral Hemorrhage Surgery.Neurocritical care · 2026Article
- Comparative effectiveness of neuroendoscopic surgery and stereotactic aspiration for brain hemorrhage.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Neuroendoscopic hematoma evacuation vs. craniotomy in hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage: a retrospective comparative study on surgical efficiency and long-term functional outcomes.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
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
Due to the absence of direct visualization during the operative field in stereotactic surgery for sICH, there exists individual variability in hematoma evacuation (HE) rates, with about 42% of patients not attaining the expected threshold for HE. The aim of this study was to find the relevant factors affecting HE during the treatment of sICH with stereotactic surgery. We pooled individual data from our prospective ICH database, encompassing patients who underwent stereotactic aspiration and catheter drainage. The primary outcome was HE rates prior to extubation. Multivariate logistic regression using the stepwise forward method to identify the independent risk factors. A predictive scoring model was developed based on regression coefficients. To evaluate its discrimination performance, we conducted ROC curve analysis and calculated the AUC. Additionally, we employed calibration curves as an indicator of concordance. The bootstrap internal validation was used to ascertain the model's stability. DCA was performed to determine the clinical utility. The study included 90 patients, of whom 43 (47.8%) patients achieved HE rates ≥ 70%. The multivariate logistic analysis showed that blend sign (OR 7.003, 95% CI 2.118-23.161, P = 0.001), irregular shape (OR 0.235, 95% CI 0.067-0.821, P = 0.023), two drainage tubes (OR 28.643, 95% CI 1.872-438.181, P = 0.016), diabetes (OR 0.078, 95% CI 0.006-0.948, P = 0.045), and hematoma edge linked to ventricle (OR 0.145, 95% CI 0.032-0.659, P = 0.012) were independent risk factors. For clinical use, the Model-score was established, with a total score ranging from -6 to 5. The AUC values of the Model-logit and Model-score were 0.820 (95% CI 0.733-0.906) and 0.822 (95% CI 0.737-0.908) respectively. The cutoff values were 0.275 and -0.5. Calibration curves demonstrated excellent agreement between predicted probabilities and observed outcomes in both models. Utilizing the bootstrap method for internal validation, the mean AUC values were determined to be 0.819 (95% CI 0.736-0.903) for Model-logit and 0.823 (95% CI 0.742-0.903) for Model-score, demonstrating stability across the resampled datasets. The DCA confirmed that both models provide superior net benefit for predicting HE rates ≥ 70% when the individualized threshold ranges from 10 to 82%. The predictive model of HE rates ≥ 70% prior to extuation has demonstrated predictive capability, holds the potential to assist clinicians in optimizing surgical efficiency.
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.