Chronic subdural hematoma recurrence due to contralateral neovascularization following middle meningeal artery embolization

Introduction Chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH) is one of the most commonly encountered neurosurgical diseases. Middle meningeal artery embolization (MMAE) is a technique for the management of CSDH that has elicited promising results. Despite the encouraging results of MMAE, recurrence does occur. One uncommon mechanism for recurrence of CSDH is by means of neovascularization of the contralateral middle meningeal artery (MMA). We describe two cases of CSDH recurrence by means of contralateral middle meningeal artery neovascularization treated with contralateral MMAE. Methods We identified two cases of recurrent subdural hematoma secondary to neovascularization following treatment with contralateral MMAE. Results Two patients initially treated with MMAE were identified with CSDH recurrence secondary to contralateral MMA neovascularization. There was no traumatic or coagulopathic contribution to CSDH recurrence. In both cases, patients underwent contralateral MMAE. Both patients were neurologically intact with radiographic improvement of CSDH at follow up. Conclusions Re-accumulation of SDH following MMAE by means of contralateral MMA neovascularization is a rare subtype of subdural hematoma (SDH) recurrence following MMAE. Within the context of re-accumulation of SDH following MMAE, catheter angiography is an important diagnostic investigation to elucidate the etiology of the recurrence. Furthermore, when angiography reveals neovascularization of the contralateral MMA, embolization of the contralateral MMA achieves good clinical and radiographic result.

Total 1-year hospital cost of middle meningeal artery embolization compared to surgery for chronic subdural hematomas: a propensity-adjusted analysis

BackgroundMiddle meningeal artery (MMA) embolization results in fewer treatment failures than surgical evacuation for chronic subdural hematomas (cSDHs). We compared the total 1-year hospital cost for MMA embolization versus surgical evacuation for patients with cSDH.MethodsData for patients who presented with cSDHs from January 1, 2018, through May 31, 2020, were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were grouped by initial treatment (surgery vs MMA embolization), and total hospital cost was obtained. A propensity-adjusted analysis was performed. The primary outcome was difference in mean hospital cost between treatments.ResultsOf 170 patients, 48 (28%) underwent embolization and 122 (72%) underwent surgery. cSDHs were larger in the surgical (20.5 (6.7) mm) than in the embolization group (16.9 (4.6) mm; P<0.001); and index hospital length of stay was longer in the surgical group (9.8 (7.0) days) than in the embolization group (5.7 (2.4) days; P<0.001). More patients required additional hematoma treatment in the surgical cohort (16%) than in the embolization cohort (4%; P=0.03), and more required readmission in the surgical cohort (28%) than in the embolization cohort (13%; P=0.04). After propensity adjustment, MMA embolization was associated with a lower total hospital cost compared to surgery (mean difference −$32 776; 95% CI −$52 766 to −$12 787; P<0.001). A propensity-adjusted linear regression analysis found that unexpected additional treatment was the only significant contributor to total hospital cost (mean difference $96 357; 95% CI $73 886 to $118 827; P<0.001).ConclusionsMMA embolization is associated with decreased total hospital cost compared with surgery for cSDHs. This lower cost is directly related to the decreased need for additional treatment interventions.

Radiographic clearance of chronic subdural hematomas after middle meningeal artery embolization

BackgroundFew reports discuss variables associated with improved outcomes after middle meningeal artery (MMA) embolization for chronic subdural hematomas (cSDHs). We analyzed radiographic evidence of cSDH clearance after MMA embolization to elucidate optimal techniques, hematoma clearance rates, and suitable length of follow-up.MethodsPatients who underwent MMA embolization for cSDH from January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2020 were analyzed. Patient characteristics, demographics, and technical procedural details were examined. Outcomes for cSDHs analyzed included complete or near-complete resolution at 30, 90, and 180 days following embolization. A multivariable logistic regression analysis identified variables predictive of rapid clearance and resolution of hematomas at 90 days.ResultsThe study cohort comprised 66 patients with 84 treated cSDHs. The mean (SD) cSDH size differed significantly at 30-day (8.8 (4.3) mm), 90-day (3.4 (3.0) mm), and 180-day (1.0 (1.7) mm) follow-up (p<0.001). More cSDHs had complete or near-complete resolution at 180 days (92%, 67/73) than at 90 (63%, 45/72) and 30 days (18%, 15/84) post-embolization (p<0.001). Only distal embolysate penetration was independently associated with rapid clearance (OR 3.9, 95% CI 1.4 to 11.1; p=0.01) and resolution of cSDHs at 90 days (OR 5.0, 95% CI 1.7 to 14.6; p=0.003).ConclusionAlthough 63% of cSDHs with MMA embolization had complete or near-complete resolution by 90 days post-procedure, 92% reached this stage by 180 days. Therefore, 90-day follow-up may be insufficient to determine the effectiveness of MMA embolization for cSDHs, particularly compared with surgical evacuation alone. Also, distal MMA penetration may be associated with more rapid hematoma clearance.