| Literature DB >> 34349724 |
Hitoshi Kobata1, Naokado Ikeda2.
Abstract
The efficacy and safety of surgical treatment for intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) have long been subjects of investigation and debate. The recent results of the minimally invasive surgery plus alteplase for intracerebral hemorrhage evacuation (MISTIE) III trial demonstrated the safety of the procedure and a reduction in mortality compared to medical treatment. Although no improvement in functional outcomes was shown, the trial elucidated that benefits of intervention depend on surgical performance: a greater ICH reduction, defined as ≤ 15 mL end of treatment ICH volume or ≥70% volume reduction, correlated with significant functional improvement. Recent meta-analyses suggested the benefits of neurosurgical hematoma evacuation, especially when performed earlier and done using minimally invasive procedures. In MISTIE III, to confirm hemostasis and reduce the risk of rebleeding, the mean time from onset to surgery and treatment completion took 47 and 123 h, respectively. Theoretically, the earlier the hematoma is removed, the better the outcome. Therefore, a higher rate of hematoma reduction within an earlier time course may be beneficial. Neuroendoscopic surgery enables less invasive removal of ICH under direct visualization. Minimally invasive procedures have continued to evolve with the support of advanced guidance systems and devices in favor of better surgical performance. Ongoing randomized controlled trials utilizing emerging minimally invasive techniques, such as the Early Minimally Invasive Removal of Intra Cerebral Hemorrhage (ENRICH) trial, Minimally Invasive Endoscopic Surgical Treatment with Apollo/Artemis in Patients with Brain Hemorrhage (INVEST) trial, and the Dutch Intracerebral Hemorrhage Surgery Trial (DIST), may provide significant information on the optimal treatment for ICH.Entities:
Keywords: endoscopic surgery; intracerebral hemorrhage; minimally invasive surgery; stereotactic surgery; surgical performance; thrombolysis
Year: 2021 PMID: 34349724 PMCID: PMC8326326 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2021.703189
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurol ISSN: 1664-2295 Impact factor: 4.003
Figure 1A case of large lobar hemorrhage (110 ml). CT scans before (A) and after operation (B). #Hematoma remnant.
Figure 2Endoscopic view through a transparent sheath inserting to the hematoma cavity. *Hard clot difficult to suction.
Summary of recent meta-analyses on minimally invasive surgery for intracerebral hemorrhage.
| Sun et al. ( | 1,506 | 8 | NE vs. CT | Good functional outcome | OR | 3.27 (1.73, 6.21) |
| 1,859 | 15 | Mortality | 0.43 (0.32, 0.58) | |||
| 883 | 10 | Hematoma evacuation rate | 8.14 (3.46, 12.83) | |||
| 781 | 7 | Blood loss volume | −294.77 (−494.61, −94.93) | |||
| 1,060 | 13 | Operation time | −99.03 (−119.56, −78.50) | |||
| 287 | 3 | Hospital stay | −2.32 (−3.96, −0.68) | |||
| 157 | 3 | ICU stay | −4.35 (−6.45, −2.26) | |||
| Zhou et al. ( | 1,955 | 11 | MIS vs. conservative | Significant neurological debilitation or death | RR | 0.82 (0.72, 0.94) |
| 1,955 | 11 | Death | 0.74 (0.62, 0.88) | |||
| Sontag et al. ( | 3,886 | 20 | Any surgery vs. medical | Good functional outcome | RR | 1.40 (1.22, 1.60) |
| 2,045 | 20 | MIS vs. medical | 1.47 (1.26, 1.72) | |||
| 2,133 | 4 | Any surgery vs. medical | 1.10 (0.98, 1.25) | |||
| Xia, et al. ( | 2,466 | 14 | MIS vs. CT | Mortality | RR | 0.76 (0.60, 0.97) |
| 1,273 | 10 | Rebleeding | 0.42 (0.19, 0.95) | |||
| 1,858 | 6 | Good recovery | 2.27 (1.34, 3.83) | |||
| Nam and Kim ( | 295 | 3 | NE vs. CT | Death | OR | 0.56 (0.24, 1.31) |
| 295 | 3 | Complication | 0.11 (0.03, 0.20) | |||
| Zhao et al. ( | 295 | 3 | NE vs. CT | Death | RR | 0.58 (0.26, 1.29) |
| 295 | 3 | Complication | 0.11 (0.06, 0.20) | |||
| Tang et al. ( | 258 | 4 | MIS vs. conservative | GOS score | RR | 1.55 (1.21, 1.97) |
| 352 | 5 | MIS vs. CT | 1.69 (1.10, 2.59) | |||
| 282 | 4 | MIS vs. conservative | Pulmonary infection | 1.26 (1.13, 1.40) | ||
| 486 | 3 | MIS vs. CT | 0.47 (0.26, 0.83) | |||
| 600 | 6 | MIS vs. conservative | Mortality | 0.26 (0.17, 0.40) | ||
| 1,127 | 8 | MIS vs. CT | 0.84 (0.65, 1.09) | |||
| 696 | 4 | MIS vs. CT | ADL score | 1.26 (1.13, 1.40) | ||
| 745 | 6 | MIS vs. CT | Rebleeding | 0.47 (0.26, 0.83) | ||
| Scaggiante et al. ( | 2,152 | 15 | MIS vs. other treatment | Significant neurological debilitation or death | OR | 0.46 (0.36, 0.57) |
| 863 | 5 | MIS vs. CT | 0.44 (0.29, 0.67) | |||
| 384 | 5 | NE vs. other treatment | 0.40 (0.25, 0.66) | |||
| 1,526 | 8 | SE vs. other treatment | 0.47 (0.34, 0.65) | |||
| 2,086 | 14 | MIS vs. other treatment | Death | 0.59 (0.45, 0.76) | ||
| 797 | 5 | MIS vs.CT | 0.56 (0.37, 0.84) | |||
| 384 | 5 | NE vs. other treatment | 0.37 (0.20, 0.67) | |||
| 1,404 | 7 | SE vs. other treatment | 0.76 (0.56, 1.04) | |||
| Yao et al. ( | 1,213 | 18 | NE vs. other treatment | Mortality | RR | 0.61 (0.48, 0.78) |
| 721 | 10 | GOS 1–3, mRS 4–6 | 0.78 (0.70, 0.87) | |||
| 881 | 13 | Rebleeding | 0.40 (0.23, 0.69) | |||
| 641 | 8 | Pneumonia | 0.42 (0.28, 0.61) | |||
| 364 | 4 | Meningitis | 0.52 (0.16, 1.70) | |||
| 395 | 3 | Epilepsy | 0.58 (0.32, 1.05) | |||
| 451 | 4 | Digestive disease | 1.27 (0.75, 2.15) | |||
High quality studies only.
NS, neuroendoscopy; MIS, minimally invasive surgery; SE, stereotactic evacuation; CT, craniotomy; GOS, Glasgow Outcome Scale; mRS, modified Rankin Scale; OR, Odds ratio; RR, Risk ratio.
Ongoing studies of minimally invasive surgery for intracerebral hemorrhage.
| ENRICH | Randomized | NICO BrainPath and Myriad | Functional improvement (mRS) | 300 | <24 h | December 2016 | December 2021 |
| INVEST | Single arm | Apollo System | Rate of recruitment/successful follow up obtainment | 50 | <72h | June 30, 2017 | June 2021 |
| MIND | Randomized | Artemis Neuro Evacuation Devices | Global disability (mRS)/Mortality | 500 | <72 h | February 7, 2018 | July 2025 |
| DIST | Non-randomized | Artemis Neuro Evacuation Devices | Death/Neurological deterioration/Proportion of volume reduction | 400 | <8 h | December 3, 2018 | February 2021 |
| EVACUATE | Randomized | Aurora Surgiscope System | mRS | 240 | <8 h | September, 2020 | December, 2026 |
| MIRROR | Observational | Aurora Surgiscope System | Rate of Surgical Success (reduction to <15 ml) | 500 | <12 h | October, 2020 | October, 2029 |
Official title of the study.
ENRICH, A Multi-center, Randomized, Clinical Trial Comparing Standard Medical Management to Early Surgical Hematoma Evacuation Using Minimally Invasive Parafascicular Surgery (MIPS) in the Treatment of Intracerebral Hemorrhage (ICH).
INVEST, A Single Arm, Feasibility Study of Minimally Invasive Endoscopic Surgical Treatment with Apollo for Supratentorial Intracerebral Hemorrhage (ICH).
MIND, A Prospective, Multicenter Study of Artemis: A Minimally Invasive Neuro Evacuation Device in the Removal of Intracerebral Hemorrhage.
DIST, The Dutch Intracerebral Hemorrhage Surgery Trial Pilot Study: Minimally-invasive Endoscopy-guided Surgery for Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage.
EVACUATE, Ultra-Early, Minimally inVAsive intraCerebral Hemorrhage evacUATion vs. Standard treatment.
MIRROR, Minimally Invasive IntRaceRebral HemORrhage Evacuation.
mRS, modified Rankin Scale.
Figure 3Emerging minimally invasive instruments. (A) NICO BrainPath system and myriad handpiece (NICO Corp, Indianapolis, IN, USA). (B) The Apollo system. The Wand and aspiration–irrigation system (Penumbra Inc, Alameda, CA, USA). (C) The Artemis Neuro Evacuation Device and Pump MAX™ aspiration system (Penumbra, Alameda, CA, USA).
Figure 4Head CT scans on arrival (A), immediately after ICH removal (B), and diffusion-weighted MRI images next day (C).