Impact of antithrombotic agents on outcomes in patients requiring surgery for chronic subdural haematoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

A chronic subdural haematoma (CSDH) is a collection of aged blood between the dura and the brain, typically treated with surgical evacuation. Many patients with CSDH have comorbidities requiring the use of antithrombotic medications. The optimal management of these medications in the context of CSDH remains unknown, as the risk of recurrence must be carefully weighed against the risk of vaso-occlusive events. To better understand these risks and inform the development of clinical practice guidelines, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, searching Medline and Embase databases. The study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023397061). A total of 44 studies were included, encompassing 1 prospective cohort study and 43 retrospective cohort studies. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for CSDH recurrence and vaso-occlusive events in patients taking anticoagulant or antiplatelet medications compared to patients not receiving antithrombotic therapy. GRADE was used to assess the quality of evidence. In patients on anticoagulant therapy at CSDH diagnosis, the pooled OR for CSDH recurrence was 1.41 (95% CI 1.11 to 1.79; I2 = 28%). For patients on antiplatelet therapy, the pooled OR was 1.31 (95% CI 1.08 to 1.58; I2 = 32%). Patients taking antithrombotic medications had a significantly higher risk of vaso-occlusive events, with a pooled OR of 3.74 (95% CI 2.12 to 6.60; I2 = 0%). There was insufficient evidence to assess the impact of time to recommence antithrombotic medication on CSDH outcomes. We found that baseline antithrombotic use is associated with the risk of CSDH recurrence and vaso-occlusive events following surgical evacuation. The evidence base is of low quality, and decisions regarding antithrombotic therapy should be individualised for each patient. Further high-quality, prospective studies or registry-based designs are needed to better inform clinical decision-making and establish evidence-based guidelines.

Management of mild degenerative cervical myelopathy and asymptomatic spinal cord compression: an international survey.

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. OBJECTIVE: Currently there is limited evidence and guidance on the management of mild degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) and asymptomatic spinal cord compression (ASCC). Anecdotal evidence suggest variance in clinical practice. The objectives of this study were to assess current practice and to quantify the variability in clinical practice. METHODS: Spinal surgeons and some additional health professionals completed a web-based survey distributed by email to members of AO Spine and the Cervical Spine Research Society (CSRS) North American Society. Questions captured experience with DCM, frequency of DCM patient encounters, and standard of practice in the assessment of DCM. Further questions assessed the definition and management of mild DCM, and the management of ASCC. RESULTS: A total of 699 respondents, mostly surgeons, completed the survey. Every world region was represented in the responses. Half (50.1%, n = 359) had greater than 10 years of professional experience with DCM. For mild DCM, standardised follow-up for non-operative patients was reported by 488 respondents (69.5%). Follow-up included a heterogeneous mix of investigations, most often at 6-month intervals (32.9%, n = 158). There was some inconsistency regarding which clinical features would cause a surgeon to counsel a patient towards surgery. Practice for ASCC aligned closely with mild DCM. Finally, there were some contradictory definitions of mild DCM provided in the form of free text. CONCLUSIONS: Professionals typically offer outpatient follow up for patients with mild DCM and/or asymptomatic ASCC. However, what this constitutes varies widely. Further research is needed to define best practice and support patient care.

Hard collar immobilisation following elective surgery on the cervical spine: a cross-sectional survey of UK spinal surgeons.

INTRODUCTION: Although mostly used in the management of spinal trauma, hard collar immobilisation is also used as an adjunct to recovery after elective cervical spine surgery. Many surgeons believe that bracing reduces the risk of non-union and pain and provides a subjective sense of security for patients. There is little if any, evidence for this practice and immobilisation can be a direct cause of adverse events. The primary aim of this study was to provide an updated assessment of post-operative bracing practice in UK spinal surgeons, including the indications, rationale and perspectives on compliance and complications. METHODS: Neurosurgeons and spinal orthopaedic surgeons completed a web-based survey distributed by email to members of the Society of British Neurological Surgeons (SBNS) and the British Association of Spinal Surgeons (BASS). Professional information captured included level of experience and whether surgeons had a specialist interest in spinal surgery. Questions first focused on the frequency and duration of hard collar immobilisation for common decompressive procedures. Later questions captured surgeon rationale, perceptions of patient compliance, complications, and collar removal. RESULTS: A total of 86 surgeons completed the survey, of whom 83% were spinal specialists. In total, 33 (38%) surgeons recommend a hard collar following at least one of the elective procedures listed. Collars were most commonly recommended following cervical corpectomy (30%). The support of fusion and bone healing was the most common rationale (82%), with post-operative pain (45%) and limiting patient activity (39%) also considered. Most surgeons (69%) believed that their patients were compliant. All listed types of complications were reported, with impaired activities of daily living (41%) and impaired sleep (34%) the most frequently cited. CONCLUSIONS: Current post-operative use of hard collars is much lower in the United Kingdom than previously reported in the United States. Surgeon decision-making is inconsistent and may benefit from greater standardisation. Future work is needed to help develop guidelines as a move away from arbitrary to evidence-based practice.