Open AccessEfficacy of neuroendoscopic surgery versus craniotomy for supratentorial hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage: A meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials
Author(s) -
Zhao XuHui,
Zhang SuZhen,
Feng Jin,
Li ZhenZhong,
Ma ZengLu
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
brain and behavior
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.915
H-Index - 41
ISSN - 2162-3279
DOI - 10.1002/brb3.1471
Subject(s) - medicine , craniotomy , randomized controlled trial , meta analysis , cochrane library , surgery , intracerebral hemorrhage , mortality rate , relative risk , anesthesia , confidence interval , glasgow coma scale
Background Hypertensive cerebral hemorrhage (HCH) is a potentially life‐threatening neurological condition with an extremely high morbidity and mortality. In recent years, neuroendoscopy has been used to treat intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). However, the choice of neuroendoscopic surgery versus craniotomy for patients with intracerebral hemorrhages is controversial. Aim We conducted this meta‐analysis to assess the efficacy of neuroendoscopic surgery compared with craniotomy in patients with supratentorial hypertensive ICH. Methods A systematic electronic search was conducted of online electronic databases: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library updated on December 2017. The meta‐analysis only included randomized controlled studies. Results Three randomized controlled trials met our inclusion criteria. The pooled analysis of death showed that neuroendoscopic surgery decreased the rate of death when compared with craniotomy (RR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.26–1.29; p = .18). The pooled result of complications indicated that neuroendoscopic surgery has a tendency toward lower complications (RR = 0.37, 95% CI 0.28–0.49; p < .001). Conclusions Our results suggested that neuroendoscopic surgery has lower complications, but no superior advantages in morbidity rates. Since the advantage of neuroendoscopic surgery has been performed in some area, the continuation of multi‐center comparative investigation with craniotomy may be necessary. Moreover, some efforts need to be taken in selecting appropriate patients with different treatments.