Cost-effectiveness of craniotomy versus decompressive craniectomy for UK patients with traumatic acute subdural haematoma.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of craniotomy, compared with decompressive craniectomy (DC) in UK patients undergoing evacuation of acute subdural haematoma (ASDH). DESIGN: Economic evaluation undertaken using health resource use and outcome data from the 12-month multicentre, pragmatic, parallel-group, randomised, Randomised Evaluation of Surgery with Craniectomy for Patients Undergoing Evacuation-ASDH trial. SETTING: UK secondary care. PARTICIPANTS: 248 UK patients undergoing surgery for traumatic ASDH were randomised to craniotomy (N=126) or DC (N=122). INTERVENTIONS: Surgical evacuation via craniotomy (bone flap replaced) or DC (bone flap left out with a view to replace later: cranioplasty surgery). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: In the base-case analysis, costs were estimated from a National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective. Outcomes were assessed via the quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) derived from the EuroQoL 5-Dimension 5-Level questionnaire (cost-utility analysis) and the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOSE) (cost-effectiveness analysis). Multiple imputation and regression analyses were conducted to estimate the mean incremental cost and effect of craniotomy compared with DC. The most cost-effective option was selected, irrespective of the level of statistical significance as is argued by economists. RESULTS: In the cost-utility analysis, the mean incremental cost of craniotomy compared with DC was estimated to be -£5520 (95% CI -£18 060 to £7020) with a mean QALY gain of 0.093 (95% CI 0.029 to 0.156). In the cost-effectiveness analysis, the mean incremental cost was estimated to be -£4536 (95% CI -£17 374 to £8301) with an OR of 1.682 (95% CI 0.995 to 2.842) for a favourable outcome on the GOSE. CONCLUSIONS: In a UK population with traumatic ASDH, craniotomy was estimated to be cost-effective compared with DC: craniotomy was estimated to have a lower mean cost, higher mean QALY gain and higher probability of a more favourable outcome on the GOSE (though not all estimated differences between the two approaches were statistically significant). ETHICS: Ethical approval for the trial was obtained from the North West-Haydock Research Ethics Committee in the UK on 17 July 2014 (14/NW/1076). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN87370545.

Risk of Aneurysm Rupture (ROAR) study: protocol for a long-term, longitudinal, UK multicentre study of unruptured intracranial aneurysms.

INTRODUCTION: Unruptured intracranial aneurysms (UIA) are common in the adult population, but only a relatively small proportion will rupture. It is therefore essential to have accurate estimates of rupture risk to target treatment towards those who stand to benefit and avoid exposing patients to the risks of unnecessary treatment. The best available UIA natural history data are the PHASES study. However, this has never been validated and given the known heterogeneity in the populations, methods and biases of the constituent studies, there is a need to do so. There are also many potential predictors not considered in PHASES that require evaluation, and the estimated rupture risk is largely based on short-term follow-up (mostly 1 year). The aims of this study are to: (1) test the accuracy of PHASES in a UK population, (2) evaluate additional predictors of rupture and (3) assess long-term UIA rupture rates. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Risk of Aneurysm Rupture study is a longitudinal multicentre study that will identify patients with known UIA seen in neurosurgery units. Patients will have baseline demographics and aneurysm characteristics collected by their neurosurgery unit and then a single aggregated national cohort will be linked to databases of hospital admissions and deaths to identify all patients who may have subsequently suffered a subarachnoid haemorrhage. All matched admissions and deaths will be checked against medical records to confirm the diagnosis of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage. The target sample size is 20 000 patients. The primary outcome will be aneurysm rupture resulting in hospital admission or death. Cox regression models will be built to test each of the study's aims. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been given by South Central Hampshire A Research Ethics Committee (21SC0064) and Confidentiality Advisory Group support (21CAG0033) provided under Section 251 of the NHS Act 2006. The results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN17658526.

Study protocol for SFX-01 after subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAS): a multicentre randomised double-blinded, placebo controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) from a ruptured cerebral aneurysm carries high morbidity and mortality. Despite huge advances in techniques to secure the aneurysm, there has been little progress in the treatment of the deleterious effects of the haemorrhage.Sulforaphane is an Nrf2 inducer with anti-oxidant and anti-inflammatory properties. It has been shown to improve clinical outcome in experimental models of SAH, but is unstable. SFX-01 (Evgen Pharma) is a novel composition comprised of synthetic sulforaphane stabilised within an α-cyclodextrin complex. On ingestion, the complex releases sulforaphane making SFX-01 an ideal vehicle for delivery of sulforaphane. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The objective of the study is to assess the safety, pharmacokinetics and efficacy of SFX-01. This is a prospective, multicentre, randomised, double-blind placebo-controlled trial in patients aged 18-80 years with aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage in the previous 48 hours. 90 patients will be randomised to receive SFX-01 (300 mg) or placebo two times per day for up to 28 days.Safety will be assessed using blood tests and adverse event reporting.Pharmacokinetics will be assessed based on paired blood and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) sulforaphane levels on day 7. A subgroup will have hourly samples taken during 6 hours post-dosing on days 1 and 7. Pharmacodynamics will be assessed by haptoglobin and malondialdehyde levels, and maximum flow velocity of middle cerebral artery will be measured by transcranial Doppler ultrasound.Clinical outcomes will be assessed at days 28, 90 and 180 with modified Rankin Scale, Glasgow Outcome Score, SAH Outcome Tool, Short Form-36, Brain Injury Community Rehabilitation Outcome Scales and Check List for Cognitive and Emotional consequences following stroke. MRI at 6 months including quantitative susceptibility mapping and volumetric T1 will measure iron deposition and cortical volume.Safety, CSF sulforaphane concentration and middle cerebral artery flow velocity will be primary outcomes and all others secondary. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from South Central Hampshire A committee. Outcomes of the trial will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02614742.