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.

Morphological changes in chronic subdural hematomas following upfront middle meningeal artery embolization: sequence, timing, and association with outcomes

OBJECTIVE Middle meningeal artery embolization (MMAE) is an increasingly utilized approach for the treatment of chronic subdural hematomas (CSDHs). The course of morphological progression of CSDHs following MMAE is poorly understood. Herein, the authors aimed to describe these morphological changes and assess their prognostic significance for the outcomes on follow-up. METHODS A single-institution retrospective cohort study of CSDH cases treated by upfront MMAE, without prior or adjunctive surgical evacuation, was performed. Clinical outcomes, complications, and the need for rescue surgery on follow-up were recorded. Hematomas were categorized into 6 morphological subtypes. All baseline and follow-up head CT scans were assessed for CSDH structural appearance, density, and loculation. Changes in CSDH size were quantified via 3D reconstruction for volumetric measurement. RESULTS Overall, 52 CSDHs in 45 patients treated with upfront MMAE were identified. Hematomas were followed for a mean of 92.9 days. Volume decreased by ≥ 50% in 79.6% of the CSDHs. The overall rescue surgery rate was 9.6%. A sequence of morphological changes after MMAE was identified. Hematomas that diverged from this sequence (5.4%) all progressed toward treatment failure and required rescue surgery. The CSDHs were categorized into early, intermediate, and late stages based on the baseline morphological appearance. Progression from early to intermediate and then to late stage took 12.7 and 30.0 days, respectively, on average. The volume of early/intermediate- and late-stage hematomas decreased by ≥ 50%, a mean of 78.2 and 47.6 days after MMAE, respectively. Early- and intermediate-stage hematomas showed a trend toward more favorable outcomes compared with late-stage hematomas. The density of homogeneous hypodense hematomas (HSDHs) transiently increased immediately after MMAE (p < 0.001). A marked decrease in density and volume 1 to 3 weeks after MMAE in HSDHs was detected, the lack of which indicated an eventual need for rescue surgery. In HSDHs, a baseline mean density of < 20 HU, and a lower density than baseline by 1 month post-MMAE were predictors of favorable outcomes. The baseline hematoma volume, axial thickness, midline shift, and loculation were not correlated with MMAE outcomes. Loculated, trabecular, and laminar hematomas, which are known to have unfavorable surgical outcomes, had MMAE outcomes similar to those of other "surgical" hematomas. CONCLUSIONS The current study was the first to describe the nature, sequence, and timing of morphological changes of CSDHs after MMAE treatment and has identified structural features that can predict treatment outcomes.

Abstract 1122‐000080: Remote Learning for Neuroendovascular Procedures During the COVID‐19 Pandemic

Introduction : Telemedicine coupled with teleproctoring have been a novel practice in the last months given the restrictive mobilization orders worldwide due to the COVID‐19 pandemic, generating the impossibility to travel and learn new techniques or bring a proctor to perform procedures on‐site. Previous papers have reported the benefits of remote proctoring for endovascular procedures using online platforms, whereas others proposed the use of more simple platforms and applications for telemedicine such as Zoom Ò , WhatsApp Ò or Google Glass Ò . Our study aimed to describe our experience in the implementation of remote learning for endovascular treatment of vascular lesions using a multicamera system streamed by a web‐based platform. Methods : Endovascular treatment of aneurysms, arteriovenous malformations, and chronic subdural hematomas were streamed through a multicamera system installed in the angiosuite and shared via Zoom® platform. Four main cameras projected the angiography monitors, the operator’s hands and the overview of the room. Results : Eleven cases were performed. Aneurysms, arteriovenous malformations and chronic subdural hematomas were treated by endovascular means. Preoperative angiographic setup, intraoperative endovascular technique and postoperative management were discussed during the live streaming. No technical problems were reported. Conclusions : Remote learning with online platforms is nowadays an important tool but not a substitute to hands‐on learning for endovascular procedures. We recommend its implementation during the COVID‐19 pandemic as a temporary substitute especially for trainees who do not have access to advanced endovascular interventions.