Evidence Hub

Temporal and Geographic Variation in Outcomes After Poor-Grade Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

De Olivera Manoel AL, Msheik A, Zampieri FG, Peralta R, Rumaihi GA, Al-Thani H, Suarez JI

2026

7,726 participants

Abstract

Background: Poor-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) remains associated with high mortality and severe disability, yet contemporary outcomes may differ substantially from historical estimates. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate long-term outcomes after poor-grade aSAH and assess temporal, geographic, and treatment-related factors associated with prognosis.

Methods: PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central, Scopus, and Google Scholar were searched from inception through March 2026. Studies enrolling consecutive adults with poor-grade aSAH (World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies grades IV–V, Hunt–Hess grades IV–V, or equivalent) reporting mortality and/or functional outcomes at ≥3 months were included. To minimize survivorship bias, studies excluding untreated patients or patients dying before aneurysm treatment were excluded. Random-effects meta-analyses of proportions were performed using generalized linear mixed models. Prespecified subgroup analyses and exploratory meta-regression analyses evaluated temporal, geographic, and treatment-related factors associated with outcomes.

Results: Forty-two studies including 7,726 patients from 16 countries across 4 continents were included. The pooled favorable functional outcome rate was 27.2% (95% CI, 23.9%–30.8%), whereas pooled overall mortality was 53.3% (95% CI, 49.0%–57.5%). Pre- and post-treatment mortality were 25.9% and 33.9%, respectively. Aneurysm treatment rate was 72.0% (95%…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 7,726 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free