ReviewCureus2025
Endovascular Embolization for Chronic Subdural Hematomas: A Literature Review of the Current Evidence.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Chronic Subdural Hematoma: Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and the Emerging Role of Middle Meningeal Artery Embolization.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Therapeutic Outcomes of Middle Meningeal Artery Embolization for Chronic Subdural Hematoma.Journal of neuroendovascular therapy · 2026Review
- The subdural membrane: unraveling the pathophysiology and treatment of chronic subdural hematoma.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chronic subdural hematoma (cSDH) primarily affects elderly patients along with those who have multiple health problems, while it develops when blood collects between the dura mater and the brain. The condition results in substantial disability while also causing surgical treatment failures in certain cases. The occurrence of cSDH becomes more frequent as people age beyond 65 years old, which establishes this condition as a major health issue. The standard surgical evacuation method for treating this condition shows limited success because patients experience frequent recurrences, which motivates researchers to study endovascular embolization as an alternative treatment option. The promising endovascular embolization technique uses middle meningeal artery (MMA) embolization to target the blood supply of the neo-membrane surrounding the hematoma, thus preventing rebleeding and reducing recurrence. The available data shows that embolization of the MMA leads to better recurrence prevention than conventional surgical procedures among patients who face restrictions for surgery because of multiple health issues. The review analyzes current research about MMA embolization safety together with its effectiveness and appropriate applications for cSDH treatment. The existing evidence about endovascular embolization as adjunctive therapy to surgical procedures such as burr hole drainage or craniotomy provides a significant impact over standalone treatment for complex and recurrent cSDH cases, reducing recurrence, rescue rates, and complications. However, endovascular embolization also shows better clinical outcomes in reducing these outcomes, but for less complex cSDH cases. There is unclear or inconclusive evidence for overall cSDH patients because current research lacks large multicenter randomized controlled studies together with stringent quality standards and contains various patient groups and minimal study durations. The procedure's effectiveness remains unclear because researchers have not determined the best patient selection criteria, the most suitable embolic agent, or the most economical approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.