Evidence Hub

Does Noncontrast Computed Tomography Scan Predict Rebleeding After Endoscopic Surgery for Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage?

Yagi K, Tao Y, Hara K, Hirai S, Takai H, Kinoshita K, Oyama N, Yagita Y et al.

World neurosurgery, 2019

92 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The relationship between noncontrast computed tomography (CT) markers, which predict the expansion of spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH) under conservative treatment, and postoperative rebleeding (PR) after treatment by directly removing the sICH is unknown. This study investigated the relationship between noncontrast CT markers and PR in patients with sICH treated by endoscopic surgery.

METHODS: The study population included 92 patients with available data who underwent endoscopic surgery for sICH at our institution from January 2010 to September 2018. The correlations between PR and preoperative noncontrast CT markers, including the blend sign, hypodensities, black hole sign, heterogeneous density, and island signs, were retrospectively evaluated.

RESULTS: In 5 of the 18 patients (27.8%) with the blend sign, PR developed, whereas only 5 of 74 patients (6.8%) without the blend sign developed PR. In the univariate regression analyses, manifestation of hydrocephalus (odds ratio [OR], 8.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.15-35.68; P = 0.002), presence of the blend sign (OR, 5.31; 95% CI, 1.34-20.97; P = 0.02), and insertion of external ventricular drainage (OR, 13.88; 95% CI, 3.22-59.77; P < 0.001) were significant risk factors. The other radiographic markers were not associated with PR. In a multivariate analysis, the presence of the blend sign (OR, 22.07; 95% CI, 2.18-223.60; P = 0.009) was the only independent predictor of PR.

CONCLUSIONS: The blend…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 92 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