Same-day discharge in craniotomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, patients undergoing craniotomy were subject to extended hospital stays for intensive monitoring and management of potential complications. However, with the evolution of surgical methods, anesthesia, and postoperative protocols, the feasibility and interest in same-day discharge (SDD) are growing. This study aimed to evaluate whether same-day discharge is a safe and feasible approach in craniotomy through a meta-analysis of the available literature. METHODS: Following PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive search was conducted across Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases from inception to December 2023. Eligible studies comprised reports in English with a minimum of 4 patients who underwent craniotomies and were discharged with same-day discharge, whether single-arm or comparative with normal discharge. Single proportion analysis with 95 % confidence interval (CI) was used to pool the studies and Odds Ratio (OR) with 95 % CI was used to measure effects in comparative analysis. A random-effects model was adopted. Endpoints included success and failure of pre-planned same-day discharge, and postoperative complications throughout the hospital stay (until discharge), these complications were further categorized into major and minor complications. Also, need for reoperation, readmission within 24 h, readmission after 24 h, and mortality. RESULTS: Seven observational studies were included. Five studies were included in the single-arm analysis, comprising data from 715 patients. Four studies comprising 731 patients were included in the comparative analysis, of whom 233 were discharged on SDD, and 498 were discharged normally. The analysis revealed a success rate of 88 % (95 % CI, 83 %-94 %), readmission to the hospital within the initial 24 h rate of 2 % (95 % CI, 1 %-2 %), readmission after 24 h rate of 1 % (95 % CI, 0 %-2 %;), total postoperative complications until discharge rate of 2 % (95 % CI, 1 %-4 %), major complications rate of 0 % (95 % CI, 0 %-0 %), minor complications rate of 2 % (95 % CI, 1 %-4 %), and mortality rate of 0 % (95 % CI, 0 %-0 %). Comparative analysis for complications and mortality showed no difference between both approaches. CONCLUSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis identified that same-day discharge in craniotomy for selected patients, as well as for tumor resection craniotomies, is highly feasible and safe, with a high success rate, low failure, and reoperation rates. Moreover, for selected patients, no evidence of harm in same-day discharge was identified when compared with normal discharge. Consequently, same-day discharge may be considered a viable option, provided appropriate selection criteria are employed.

Efficacy and safety of microvascular decompression with or without partial sensory rhizotomy: a comprehensive meta-analysis and systematic review in treating trigeminal neuralgia.

Classical trigeminal neuralgia (TN), caused by vascular compression of the nerve root, is a severe cause of pain with a considerable impact on a patient's quality of life. While microvascular decompression (MVD) has lower recurrence rates when compared with partial sensory rhizotomy (PSR) alone, refractoriness can still be as high as 47%. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety profile of MVD + PSR when compared to standalone MVD for TN. We searched Medline, Embase, and Web of Science following PRISMA guidelines. Eligible studies included those with ≥ 4 patients, in English, published between January 1980 and December 2023, comparing MVD vs. MVD + PSR for TN. Endpoints were pain cure, immediate post-operative pain improvement, long-term effectiveness, long-term recurrence, and complications (facial numbness, hearing loss, and intracranial bleeding). We pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals with a random-effects model. I2 was used to assess heterogeneity, and sensitivity and Baujat analysis were conducted to address high heterogeneity. Eight studies were included, comprising a total of 1,338 patients, of whom 1,011 were treated with MVD and 327 with MVD + PSR. Pain cure analysis revealed a lower likelihood of pain cure in patients treated with MVD when compared to patients treated with MVD + PSR (OR = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.13 to 0.72). Immediate postoperative pain improvement assessment revealed a lower likelihood of improvement in the MVD group when compared with the MVD + PSR group (OR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.10 to 0.95). Facial numbness assessment revealed a lower likelihood of occurrence in MVD alone when compared to MVD + PSR (OR = 0.08, 95% CI: 0.04 to 0.15). Long-term effectiveness, long-term recurrence, hearing loss, and intracranial bleeding analyses revealed no difference between both approaches. Our meta-analysis identified that MVD + PSR was superior to MVD for pain cure and immediate postoperative pain improvement for treating TN. However, MVD + PSR demonstrated a higher likelihood of facial numbness complications. Furthermore, identified that hearing loss and intracranial bleeding complications appear comparable between the two treatments, and no difference between long-term effectiveness and recurrence.

Enhancing the quality of evidence, comparability, and reproducibility in brain arteriovenous malformations treated with open surgery research: a systematic review and proposal of a reporting guideline for surgical and clinical outcomes.

Brain Arteriovenous Malformations (bAVMs) are rare but high-risk developmental anomalies of the vascular system. Microsurgery through craniotomy is believed to be the mainstay standard treatment for many grades of bAVMs. However, a significant challenge emerges in the existing body of clinical studies on open surgery for bAVMs: the lack of reproducibility and comparability. This study aims to assess the quality of studies reporting clinical and surgical outcomes for bAVMs treated by open surgery and develop a reporting guideline checklist focusing on essential elements to ensure comparability and reproducibility. This is a systematic literature review that followed the PRISMA guidelines with the search in Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases, for studies published between January 1, 2018, and December 1, 2023. Included studies were scrutinized focusing on seven domains: (1) Assessment of How Studies Reported on the Baseline Characteristics of the Patient Sample; (2) Assessment and reporting on bAVMs grading, anatomical characteristics, and radiological aspects; (3) Angioarchitecture Assessment and Reporting; (4) Reporting on Pivotal Concepts Definitions; (5) Reporting on Neurosurgeon(s) and Staff Characteristics; (6) Reporting on Surgical Details; (7) Assessing and Reporting Clinical and Surgical Outcomes and AEs. A total of 47 studies comprising 5,884 patients were included. The scrutiny of the studies identified that the current literature in bAVM open surgery is deficient in many aspects, ranging from fundamental pieces of information of methodology to baseline characteristics of included patients and data reporting. Included studies demonstrated a lack of reproducibility that hinders building cumulative evidence. A bAVM Open Surgery Reporting Guideline with 65 items distributed across eight domains was developed and is proposed in this study aiming to address these shortcomings. This systematic review identified that the available literature regarding microsurgery for bAVM treatment, particularly in studies reporting clinical and surgical outcomes, lacks rigorous scientific methodology and quality in reporting. The proposed bAVM Open Surgery Reporting Guideline covers all essential aspects and is a potential solution to address these shortcomings and increase transparency, comparability, and reproducibility in this scenario. This proposal aims to advance the level of evidence and enhance knowledge regarding the Open Surgery treatment for bAVMs.

Ultrasound-Guided Resection of High-Grade Gliomas: A Single-Arm Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: High-grade gliomas (HGGs) present a challenge in neuro-oncology, often necessitating surgical resection for optimal management. Ultrasound holds promise in achieving better gross total resection (GTR) and improving outcomes. This meta-analysis systematically evaluates literature providing robust evidence on the use of intraoperative ultrasonography (iUSG) in HGG resection. METHODS: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines a comprehensive search was made across PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science utilized terms related to iUSG for HGG resection. The meta-analysis examined randomized trials and observational cohort studies on iUSG-guided HGG resection. GTR, subtotal resection, and postresection complications were assessed. Statistical analysis, employing R software for a single proportion analysis with confidence intervals of 95%, I2 statistics for heterogeneity, and the instrumental variables method with restricted maximum likelihood for a random effects model. RESULTS: A total of 178 patients were included in our study. The GTR overall rate in patients with iUSG-guided resection was found to be 64% (95% confidence interval: 46%-81%). Two-dimensional ultrasound remains dominant at 80% against other options of ultrasound. Complications were reported at a 15% rate (95% confidence interval: 7%-23%). CONCLUSIONS: Our study provided robust data on the utilization of iUSG-guided resection regarding the attainment of GTR and the complications related to resection. However, challenges such as outcome heterogeneity and limited complication reporting highlight the need for further research to optimize iUSG in HGG treatment. Long-term follow-up studies on patient survival and postsurgery quality of life will complement existing literature, guiding clinical practices in managing HGG.

Posterior Inferior Cerebellar Artery-Posterior Inferior Cerebellar Artery Bypass versus Occipital Artery-Posterior Inferior Cerebellar Artery Bypass for Treating Posterior Circulation Aneurysms: A Systematic Review and Comparative Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: When traditional therapies are unsuitable, revascularization becomes essential for managing posterior inferior cerebellar artery (PICA) or vertebral artery aneurysms. Notably, the PICA-PICA bypass has emerged as a promising option, overshadowing the occipital artery-PICA (OA-PICA) bypass. The objective was to compare the safety and efficacy of OA-PICA and PICA-PICA bypasses. METHODS: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of OA-PICA and PICA-PICA bypasses for treating posterior circulation aneurysms. RESULTS: We analyzed 13 studies for the PICA-PICA bypass and 16 studies on the OA-PICA bypass, involving 84 and 110 patients, respectively. The median average follow-up for PICA-PICA bypass was 8 months (2-50.3 months), while for OA-PICA, it was 27.8 months (6-84 months). The patency rate for OA-PICA was 97% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 92%-100%) and 100% (95% CI: 95%-100%) for PICA-PICA. Complication rates were 29% (95% CI: 10%-47%) for OA-PICA and 12% (95% CI: 3%-21%) for PICA-PICA. Good clinical outcomes were observed in 71% (95% CI: 52%-90%) of OA-PICA patients and 87% (95% CI: 75%-100%) of PICA-PICA patients. Procedure-related mortality was 1% (95% CI: 0%-6%) for OA-PICA and 1% (95% CI: 0%-10%) for PICA-PICA. CONCLUSIONS: Both procedures have demonstrated promising results in efficacy and safety. PICA-PICA exhibits slightly better patency rates, better clinical outcomes, and fewer complications, but with a lack of substantial follow-up and a smaller sample size. The choice between these procedures should be based on the surgeon's expertise and the patient's anatomy.

Ventriculoatrial Shunt Versus Ventriculoperitoneal Shunt: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) is usually the primary choice for cerebrospinal fluid shunting for most neurosurgeons, while ventriculoatrial shunt (VAS) is a second-line procedure because of historical complications. Remarkably, there is no robust evidence claiming the superiority of VPS over VAS. Thus, we aimed to compare both procedures through a meta-analysis. METHODS: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines, the authors systematically searched the literature for articles comparing VAS with VPS. The included articles had to detail one of the following outcomes: revisions, infections, shunt-related mortality, or complications. In addition, the cohort for each shunt model had to encompass more than 4 patients. RESULTS: Of 1872 articles, 16 met our criteria, involving 4304 patients, with 1619 undergoing VAS and 2685 receiving VPS placement. Analysis of revision surgeries showed no significant difference between VAS and VPS (risk ratio [RR] = 1.10, 95% CI: 0.9-1.34; I2 = 84%, random effects). Regarding infections, the analysis also found no significant difference between the groups (RR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.36-1.25; I2 = 74%, random effects). There was no statistically significant disparity between both methods concerning shunt-related deaths (RR = 2.11, 95% CI: 0.68-6.60; I2 = 56%, random effects). Included studies after 2000 showed no VAS led to cardiopulmonary complications, and only 1 shunt-related death could be identified. CONCLUSION: Both methods show no significant differences in procedure revisions, infections, and shunt-related mortality. The literature is outdated, research in adults is lacking, and future randomized studies are crucial to understand the profile of VAS when comparing it with VPS. The final decision on which distal site for cerebrospinal shunting to use should be based on the patient's characteristics and the surgeon's expertise.