Skip to main content

Endoscopic versus catheter-based minimally invasive evacuation of spontaneous supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhage: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal
Neurosurgical review (Q1)
Published
5 August 2026
Study design
Systematic review of cohort studies
Evidence level
Level 2, Moderate (CEBM 2a)
Authors
Shaan Patel, Shiva A Nischal, Kush M Kale, Angelette Mendonca, Keenan Piper, Pious D Patel, et al.
PMID
42552275
DOI
10.1007/s10143-026-04426-3

Why clinicians should know about it

  • Picked for Neurosurgery (top studies of the week, 9 August 2026).

Abstract

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for spontaneous supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH) includes endoscopic evacuation and catheter-based evacuation (aspiration or drainage ± thrombolysis), but comparative performance remains uncertain. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing MIS approaches. PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched (December 2025) for studies in adults undergoing endoscopic or catheter-based MIS for supratentorial sICH. Random-effects meta-analysis was conducted. Prespecified subgroup analyses stratified catheter-based techniques by thrombolysis use. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence was assessed. Twenty-nine studies (8221 patients; 5041 endoscopic; 3180 catheter-based) were included. Endoscopic evacuation was associated with lower mortality (RR 0.64; 95% CI: 0.47-0.87; P < 0.01; I2 = 44.8%), rebleeding (RR 0.58; 95% CI: 0.39-0.87; P < 0.01; I2 = 22.2%), postoperative hematoma volume (MD -5.6 mL; 95% CI: -10.30-0.90; P < 0.05; I2 = 96.9%), and higher day-one evacuation rate (MD 24.5%; 95% CI: 14.60-34.40; P < 0.001; I2 = 99.7%). Overall complications (RR 0.98; 95% CI: 0.78-1.25; P = 0.90; I2 = 48.5%) and infection (RR 1.03; 95% CI: 0.64-1.66; P = 0.05; I2 = 43.6%) were similar. Catheter-based approaches had lower intraoperative blood loss (MD 69.0 mL; 95% CI: 27.7-110.4; P < 0.001; I2 = 96.9%). Subgroup analyses suggested that mortality and evacuation rate differences favored catheter-based cohorts receiving thrombolysis. Functional outcomes diverged: GCS/GOS favored endoscopy (SMD 0.27) while mRS marginally favored catheter-based approaches (MD 0.28), a between-group difference below the threshold generally considered clinically meaningful. Endoscopic evacuation was associated with lower mortality, rebleeding, and residual hematoma burden, while catheter-based approaches retained perioperative efficiency advantages. Functional findings were mixed and of uncertain clinical significance. Given predominantly non-randomized evidence and heterogeneity, these findings should be interpreted as strategy-specific associations.

Abstract as published, via PubMed.

View on PubMedFull text at the publisherOpen in the app

For healthcare professionals. The summary is generated by AI from the published abstract, and the evidence level is assigned automatically from the study design on the Oxford CEBM hierarchy. Neither is medical advice. Read the full paper before changing practice.