Endovascular Management of Chronic Subdural Hematoma
Primary Recommendation
Middle meningeal artery (MMA) embolization is a safe and effective treatment for chronic subdural hematoma (cSDH), particularly in elderly patients, those on anticoagulation/antiplatelet therapy, and cases with recurrence after burr-hole drainage, with recurrence rates as low as 6-7% compared to 30% with surgery alone. 1, 2, 3
Clinical Context and Patient Selection
Ideal Candidates for MMA Embolization
- Elderly patients with multiple comorbidities who are poor surgical candidates 1, 2
- Patients on anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy who cannot safely discontinue these medications 4
- Recurrent cSDH after burr-hole drainage (one or multiple recurrences) 5
- Primary treatment option for symptomatic cSDH as an alternative to surgery 4
- Bilateral cSDH requiring treatment 4
The pathophysiology underlying cSDH involves neovascularization from distal MMA branches supplying the dural layers, creating a cycle of recurrent hemorrhage. MMA embolization interrupts this cycle at its source by stopping the neovascularization process and blood flow to the hematoma membrane. 1, 2
Technical Procedure: How MMA Embolization is Performed
Procedural Approach
- Anesthesia: Can be performed under local anesthesia or general anesthesia (46.1% of cases use general anesthesia in large series) 4
- Access: Standard transfemoral arterial access with catheterization of the external carotid artery and selective catheterization of the MMA 4
- Embolic agents: Two primary options with equivalent outcomes 4:
- Technical success rate: 97.4% of procedures are successfully completed 4
Bilateral Treatment Considerations
- Bilateral MMA embolization can be performed in the same session for bilateral cSDH 4
- 15 patients in the largest multi-center series underwent bilateral interventions (154 total embolizations) 4
Clinical Outcomes and Efficacy
Radiographic Response
- Median hematoma thickness reduction: 71% at mean follow-up of 95 days 4
- Significant improvement rate: 70.8% of patients achieve >50% thickness reduction on imaging 4
- Faster brain re-expansion compared to surgery alone 1
Recurrence Rates
- MMA embolization recurrence rate: 6-7% across multiple studies 3, 4
- Comparison to surgery alone: Traditional burr-hole drainage has 30% recurrence rate 2
- Need for additional treatment: Only 6.5% of patients require further cSDH treatment within 90 days 4
Clinical Improvement
- Functional improvement: 31.9% of patients show clinical improvement on National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale and modified Rankin Scale 4
- No recurrence observed in patients treated for repeated recurrence after multiple surgeries 5
Safety Profile and Complications
Overall Complication Rate
- Total complications: 6-6.5% across studies 3, 4
- Procedure-related complications: Include continued hematoma expansion (6.5% of cases) 4
- No side effects or complications from interventional treatment in smaller series with careful technique 5
Mortality
- Mortality rate: 4.4%, mostly unrelated to the index procedure but due to underlying comorbidities in elderly patients 4
Treatment Algorithms
Algorithm for Primary Treatment Decision
For newly diagnosed symptomatic cSDH:
- Elderly patients (>70 years) with significant comorbidities → Consider MMA embolization as primary treatment 2, 4
- Patients requiring continued anticoagulation/antiplatelet therapy → MMA embolization preferred over surgery 4
- Younger, healthy patients with large hematomas and mass effect → Surgical evacuation remains standard, but consider adjunctive MMA embolization 2
Algorithm for Recurrent cSDH
After first recurrence following burr-hole drainage:
- Any recurrence → MMA embolization is treatment of choice 5
- Multiple recurrences (≥2) → MMA embolization is strongly indicated 5
- Continued recurrence after embolization (rare, 6-7% of cases) → Repeat surgical evacuation 3, 4
Combined Treatment Strategy
MMA embolization can be performed:
- As standalone treatment for primary or recurrent cSDH 4
- Combined with surgical evacuation to reduce recurrence risk 2
- Timing: Can be performed before, during, or after surgical evacuation 2
Critical Pitfalls to Avoid
Common Errors
- Delaying embolization in recurrent cases: Waiting for multiple recurrences before considering MMA embolization increases patient morbidity and healthcare costs 2
- Discontinuing anticoagulation unnecessarily: MMA embolization allows treatment without stopping anticoagulation, whereas surgery typically requires temporary cessation 4
- Assuming all elderly patients need surgery: Many elderly patients with cSDH are better served by MMA embolization given lower morbidity 2
- Inadequate follow-up imaging: Follow-up CT imaging within 90 days is essential to document hematoma resolution 4
Technical Considerations
- Careful attention to procedural technique is essential to minimize complications 5
- Choice of embolic agent (particles vs. liquid embolics) does not significantly affect outcomes, allowing operator preference 4
- Bilateral disease requires bilateral treatment for optimal outcomes 4
Anticoagulation and Antiplatelet Management
Continuation of Therapy
- 30.4% of patients on antiplatelet therapy and 23.9% on anticoagulation at presentation can undergo MMA embolization safely 4
- No need to discontinue therapy for the procedure, unlike surgical evacuation 4
- This represents a major advantage in elderly patients with cardiovascular comorbidities requiring ongoing antithrombotic therapy 2
Follow-up Protocol
Imaging Schedule
- Initial follow-up CT: Within 90 days to assess hematoma thickness reduction 4
- Target outcome: >50% reduction in hematoma thickness 4
- Mean follow-up duration: 95 days in largest series 4