ReviewNeurosurgical review2026
Occult meningeal arterial bleeding in recurrent and postoperative subdural hemorrhage: implications for surgical decision-making and adjunctive middle meningeal artery embolization.
Review in Neurosurgical review, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Subdural hemorrhage is generally managed according to established surgical pathways, which are appropriate for most patients. The aim of this review was to distinguish 2 mechanistically different settings in which meningeal arterial pathology may matter: chronic subdural hematoma (cSDH), where the middle meningeal artery (MMA) supplies a pathologic membrane, and uncommon recurrent or postoperative cases in which focal MMA injury may represent one actionable arterial source. We performed a structured narrative review of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library through March 2026. For cSDH, we prioritized randomized trials, meta-analyses, and multicenter studies. For acute or postoperative focal arterial injury, where direct evidence is limited, we synthesized angiographically characterized case reports, small case series, and concept-level evidence from epidural hematoma literature. Two arterial phenotypes emerged. In cSDH, the MMA sustains the pathologic outer membrane, and embolization functions as membrane devascularization to reduce recurrence. Evidence for this phenotype is supported by randomized trials, meta-analyses, and multicenter studies. In contrast, direct angiographically confirmed evidence for focal MMA injury in acute or postoperative subdural hemorrhage remains anecdotal and is limited to isolated cases of extravasation, pseudoaneurysm, or dissection. Early clinically significant postoperative reaccumulation, recurrent hemorrhage without a convincing cortical or venous source, repeated recurrence despite adequate drainage, and discordance between intraoperative findings and postoperative progression may justify vascular reassessment in selected patients. MMA-related pathology should not be considered a dominant explanation for problematic acute subdural hematoma, nor should cSDH trial evidence be extrapolated to acute lesions. A phenotype-based framework may help identify selected recurrent or postoperative cases in which CTA/DSA and adjunctive MMA embolization are clinically actionable, while standard management remains appropriate when no arterial lesion is identified.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42730885What 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.