The purpose of this study was to compare neuroendoscopy-assisted burr-hole evacuation with conventional burr-hole evacuation in the treatment of chronic subdural hematoma (CSDH), and to evaluate the curative effect of neuroendoscopy. This study follows PRISMA guidelines and uses the keywords "chronic subdural hematoma," "neuroendoscopies," "neuroendoscopy," "endoscopy," "endoscopic neurosurgery," and "neuroendoscopic surgery" to conduct an electronic search of online databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. There were no restrictions on language or publication year. This meta-analysis involved 948 patients in six studies. The results showed that the recurrence rate in the neuroendoscopy group was significantly lower than that in the conventional burr-hole group (3.1% vs. 13.8%, P<0.001). Compared with the control group, the neuroendoscopy group had a longer operation time (P<0.001) and a shorter postoperative drainage time (P<0.001). In addition, there was no significant difference in hospital stay (P=0.14), mortality (P=0.39), postoperative morbidity (P=0.12), or 6-month neurological outcomes (P=0.32) between the two groups. It should be noted that the comparison of neurological outcomes was based on 269 patients (6/106 vs. 14/163). Compared with conventional burr-hole evacuation, neuroendoscopy-assisted burr-hole evacuation reduces the recurrence rate of CSDH and shortens the postoperative drainage time. However, the neuroendoscopy group did not have lower mortality or morbidity or better functional outcomes. In the future, randomized controlled trials are needed to further evaluate the efficacy and safety of neuroendoscopic surgery.
Keywords: burr-hole evacuation; chronic subdural hematoma; clinical outcome; meta-analysis; neuroendoscopy; recurrence.
© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.