Introduction
Search strategy
Mechanisms of brain injury and the hyperacute management after intracerebral hemorrhage
External ventricular drain insertion for intraventricular hemorrhage management
Craniotomy for supratentorial hemorrhage drainage
Strong points of STICH trials • Well-designed, well-powered randomized clinical trials • Multicenter, multinational • The research question tested was biologically plausible • Very low rate of missing long-term follow-up • Adoption of prognosis-based outcome • The surgical group was limited to patients who had early surgery (within 72 h of hemorrhage and within 24 h of randomization) • Although the patients, surrogates, and site investigators were aware of treatments’ allocation; the data manager was the only study person that knew patients’ allocation at the coordinating center. | |
Weak points of STICH trials • Large cross-over from conservative to surgical group: approximately one quarter of patients in the initial conservative group crossed over to surgery due to delayed neurological deterioration. These patients were more likely to bear hematomas ≥ 50 ml, and those with a predicted poor prognosis • The clinical uncertain principle: patients were only included if the responsible neurosurgeon was unsure about the clinical benefits of either treatment. Therefore, patients who were considered to benefit from hematoma evacuation were not included in the study. The evaluation and decision were on discretion of responsible neurosurgeon, leading to selection bias. However, including comatose patients with expanding hematomas or brain herniation in the conservative management would not be ethically acceptable, since surgery is likely a life-saving measure for this subset of patients. • If no patient had crossed over to surgery, the rates of unfavorable outcome and death in the initial conservative management group may have been higher. • Large number of excluded patients in the STICH II trial (> 3300) because of impaired level of consciousness at the time of randomization, which adds additional selection bias to the study. Patients with preserved level of consciousness are those with less severe hemorrhages, therefore these patients have a higher likelihood of favorable outcome, irrespective of treatment. |
Study | Design | Surgical technique | Included patients (conservative/surgery) | Crossover | Timing of surgery (h) | Outcome definition and timing of assessment | Findings |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
McKissock et al. (1961) [31] | Double-center, prospective randomized clinical trial | Craniotomy | 180 (91/89) | 1 patient | 72 (most patients were treated within 48 h) | - Full work; partial disability; total disability - 6 months | The authors were “unable to demonstrate any benefit from surgery in regard either to mortality or morbidity” |
Auer et al. (1989) [32] | Prospective single-center randomized clinical trial | Endoscopic-guided evacuation | 100 (50/50) | Not reported | 48 | - 6 Grades Outcome* - 6 months | Lower mortality (30 vs. 70%, p < 0.05) and higher rates of favorable outcome (40 vs. 25%, p < 0.01) in the surgical group. These results were limited to patients with subcortical hemorrhages, who were alert or somnolent perioperatively. The outcome was not improved by surgery in putaminal or thalamic hemorrhages. |
Juvela et al. (1989) [33] | Prospective single-center randomized clinical trial | Craniotomy | 52 (26/26) | Not reported | 48 | - Glasgow Outcome Scale - 1, 6, and 12 months | Surgery did not offer any advantage over conservative treatment. Additionally, in comatose patients (GCS = 7–10), surgery decreased mortality, but patients survived with poor quality of life. |
Batjer et al. (1990) [34] | Prospective single-center randomized clinical trial | Craniotomy | - Total = 21 - 9 best medical management - 4 best medical management + intracranial pressure monitoring - 8 surgical evacuation | None | 24 | 1 (dead or vegetative) 2 (dependent) 3 (independent at home) 4 (return to prestrike activity) - 6 months | - 4 out of 8 patients died in the surgical group - 2 were capable of independent life. - Surgery was ineffective compared with best medical management or best medical management + ICP monitoring |
Morgenstern et al. (1998) [35] | Prospective single-center randomized clinical trial | Craniotomy | 41 (34/7) | None | 12 | - Barthel score and mortality - 1 and 6 months | - 6-month mortality rate and functional outcome favor conservative group |
Zuccarello M et al. (1999) [36] | Prospective three centers randomized clinical trial | Craniotomy CT-guided stereotaxic placement of a catheter | 20 (11/9) - 5 craniotomy - 4 stereotaxic evacuation - 11 best medical therapy | 1 patient | 24 | - Glasgow Outcome Scale - 3 months | No difference in the likelihood of a good outcome or mortality at 3 months. |
Morgenstern et al. (2001) [37] | Prospective single-center cohort | Ultra-early craniotomy | 11 (all surgical) | None | 4 | - Barthel score, modified Rankin Scale and mortality - 6 months | - Interrupted after planned interim analysis, because of increased rates of rebleeding with ultra-early craniotomy |
Teernstra et al. (2003) [38] | Multicenter randomized controlled trial (13 centers) | Stereotactic aspiration combined with urokinase injection | 71 (35/36) | - One crossover from medical to craniotomy - One patient from stereotactic group underwent craniotomy - Four patients received no stereotactic drainage | 72 | - Death - 6 months | - The trial was prematurely stopped due to slow recruitment - Mortality 3-months was not statistically significant, 56% in the surgical group vs. 59% in the nonsurgical group |
Hattori et al. (2004) [39] | Prospective single-center randomized clinical trial | Stereotactic evacuation | 242 (121/121) | None | - Modified Rankin Scale - 12 months | Stereotactic evacuation reduced mortality and improved functional outcomes in patients with neurological Grade 3 (eyes closed but open to strong stimuli) | |
STICH (2005) [40] | Multicenter randomized controlled trial (83 centers in 27 countries) | Craniotomy 75% Burrhole 8% Endoscopy 7% Stereotaxy 7% Other 3% Not recorded | 1033 (530/503) | 26% | 72 h of ictus and 24 h of randomization | - Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale according to a prognosis-based methodology - 6 months | No overall benefit in mortality or functional outcome mortality was found with surgery |
Pantazis et al. (2006) [41] | Prospective single-center randomized clinical trial | Craniotomy | 108 (54/54) | 2 patients | 8 | - Glasgow Outcome Scale - 12 months | - 33% of patients in the surgical group vs. only 9% of patients in the conservative group had a Glasgow Outcome Scale > 3 (p < 0.05). - There is no mortality benefit with surgery. - When functional outcome was stratified by neurological status on admission, hematoma volume and location, no benefit with surgery was seen for patients with GCS < 8 or ICH ≥ 80 ml at enrollment |
Kim et al. (2009) [42] | Prospective single-center randomized clinical trial | Stereotactic-guided evacuation | 387 (183/204) | 23 patients (they were excluded from the analysis) | 12 h up to 5 days | - Modified Barthel Indices (MBI) and the modified Rankin Scale - 6 months | - Stereotactic-guided evacuation had a significant effect on a functional recovery - MBI was 90.9 in the surgical group vs. 62.4 in conservative group (p < 0.05) - mRS was 1.2 in the surgical group vs. 3.0 in the conservative group (p < 0.05) |
Wang et al. (2009) [43] | Multicenter randomized controlled trial (42 centers) | Minimally invasive craniopuncture combined with urokinase injection | 377 (182/195) | - 16 patients (7 patients randomized to craniopuncture therapy refused operation, and 9 patients randomized to conservative treatment crossover to surgery) - they were excluded from the analysis | Mean time in hours from stroke onset to operation (SD) = 21.1 (15.9) | - Modified Rankin Scale and Barthel Index - 3 months | - No significant difference in activities of daily living score - The proportion of dependent survival patients (modified Rankin scale > 2) in the craniopuncture group (40.9%) was significantly lower than that in the conservative group (63.0%) - No significant difference in the cumulative fatality rates |
STICH II (2013) [44] | Multicenter randomized controlled trial (78 centers) | Craniotomy 99% Craniectomy < 1% †Minimally invasive 1% | 601 (294/307) | 21% | 48 h of ictus and 12 h of randomization | - Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale according to a prognosis-based methodology - 6 months | - 59% of the surgery group had an unfavorable outcome versus 62% in the initial conservative group (absolute difference = 3.7%, 95% CI = − 4.3–11.6, OR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.62–1.20, p = 0.367). - No overall benefit in functional outcome or mortality was found |
MISTIE (2016) [45] | Randomized, controlled, open-label, phase 2 trial (26 centers) | Image-guided, catheter-based, stereotactic aspiration and thrombolysis (alteplase 0.3 mg or 1.0 mg every 8 h for up to nine doses) | 96 (42/54) | - 4 patients in the conservative group and 2 in the minimally invasive surgery plus alteplase underwent craniotomy | - 57% underwent surgery within 36 h, while 43% underwent surgery beyond 36 h | - Primary outcomes: 30-day mortality; 7-day procedure-related mortality; 30-day bacterial brain infection; symptomatic bleeding within 72 h after the last dose. | - Primary outcomes did not differ between the two groups - Asymptomatic hemorrhages were more common in the surgical group |
Intraoperative Stereotactic Computed Tomography-Guided Endoscopic Surgery for Brain Hemorrhage (2016) [46] | Multicenter randomized controlled trial (78 centers) | Intraoperative Stereotactic Computed Tomography-Guided Endoscopic Surgery | 24 | None | 48 | - Modified Rankin Scale - 6 and 12 months | - Early computerized tomographic image-guided endoscopic surgery is a safe and effective - One bleed occurred peri-operatively - The surgical intervention group had a greater percentage of patients with favorable neurological outcome |
CLEAR III (2017) [24] | Randomized, multicenter, multiregional, placebo-controlled trial (73 centers) | Thrombolytic removal of intraventricular hemorrhage (alteplase 1 mg through an EVD, every 8 h, to a max. 12 doses) | 500 (251 placebo/ 249 alteplase) | None | 72 | - Modified Rankin Scale - 6 months | - The injection of intrathecal alteplase did not improve functional outcomes in IVH patients - 6-month modified Rankin scale (mRS) of 0–3 was not significantly different between the r-tPA and saline groups - Treatment was associated with lower case, to the cost of a higher proportion of patients in a vegetative state |
MISTIE III (2019) [47] | Randomized, controlled, open-label, blinded endpoint phase 3 trial (78 centers) | Minimally invasive catheter evacuation followed by thrombolysis (alteplase 1.0 mg every 8 h for up to nine doses) | 506 (251/255) | None | 72 | - Modified Rankin Scale - 12 months | - MISTIE did not improve long-term outcome - 110 patients (45%) in the MISTIE group vs. 100 patients (41%) in the conservative group achieved a favorable outcome [adjusted risk difference 4% (95% CI − 4 to 12); p = 0.33] - Meta-analysis including only multisite trials of MISTIE was performed by the authors and no significant benefit of MISTIE was found (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.29–1.26). |
Minimally invasive surgical approaches for ICH
Ongoing trials on minimally invasive surgery
What does conservative treatment mean?
Why surgical ICH trials may have failed?
-
The primary injury of hemorrhage is not possible to be treated with surgery.
-
Neurosurgical patients requiring urgent procedures are difficult to recruit.
-
The ideal candidate and the optimal timing of surgery are essential questions that have not been determined [61].
-
Many clinicians would consider hematoma drainage a life-saving measure in some situations; therefore, patients who were considered to benefit from surgery were not enrolled in these studies.
-
Large crossover from medical management to surgical group. If no patient had crossed over from medical management to surgical group, the rates of unfavorable outcome and death with conservative management would have been higher.
-
Problems with study designed, sample size, and number of excluded patients.
-
Slow recruitment due to very restrictive inclusion protocols. A population-based study showed that very small percentages of ICH patients were eligible for the STICH II trial, i.e., 9.5% of lobar ICH without IVH and only 3.7% of all ICH patients [62].