{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,18]],"date-time":"2026-08-18T05:44:30Z","timestamp":1787031870453,"version":"build-2736575974"},"reference-count":42,"publisher":"Hamad bin Khalifa University Press (HBKU Press)","issue":"3","content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":[],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,10,18]]},"abstract":"Background: Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) remains a devastating disease with high morbidity and mortality. The mortality rate ranges from 40% at 1 month to 54% at 1 year, and only 12%\u201339% achieve good outcomes and functional independence. The current management guidelines for spontaneous supratentorial ICH are still controversial.<\/jats:p>\n Objective: Patients who presented with ICH and underwent craniotomy with hematoma evacuation or minimal procedures from January 2016 to May 2020 were included in the analysis. Several clinical, radiological, and surgical variables were collected to identify the variables most likely related to lower mortality and better functional outcomes.<\/jats:p>\n Results: A total of 87 patients presented with HMC with ICH from January 2016 to May 2020.<\/jats:p>\n \n The mean age was 44.7 (42.2\u201347.2) years. There were 76 male (87.4%)\/11 female (12.6%) patients, which reflect the population distribution in Qatar, which is mainly male predominant. Although Qatar is mainly a Middle-Eastern country, the ethnic distribution of patients was mainly of South Asian and Indian (60.9%) and Far-Eastern (20.7%) ethnicities because of diversity. The mean baseline Glasgow coma scale (GCS) was 8.2+\/\u00a0\u2212\u00a03.7. The mean baseline functional independence measure (FIM) score was 59.4+\/\u00a0\u2212\u00a036.7. Most hematomas were located in the basal ganglia (79.3%%). Baseline characteristics based on long-term outcomes are summarized in Table 1. The following variables were correlated with poor outcome: low GCS on postoperative day 1 (P\u00a0=\u00a00.06), low FIM score (P\u00a0=\u00a00.006), ICH location (P\u00a0=\u00a00.04), distance of the closest point to the surface (P\u00a0=\u00a00.009), and presence of uncal herniation (P\u00a0=\u00a00.04). The baseline characteristics based on mortality are outlined in Table 2. The following variables were correlated with mortality: diabetes mellitus (P\u00a0=\u00a00.02), baseline GCS (P\u00a0=\u00a00.04), GCS on postoperative day 1 (P\u00a0=\u00a00.002), unequal pupils (P\u00a0=\u00a00.05), and postoperative midline shift (P\u00a0=\u00a00.001).\n \n Table 1<\/jats:label>\n \n Baseline characteristics based on long-term outcomes<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:caption>\n \n \n \n Variables<\/jats:td>\n Good outcomes (mRS 0\u20132)<\/jats:td>\n Poor outcomes (mRS 3\u20136)<\/jats:td>\n P value<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n <\/jats:thead>\n \n \n Total<\/jats:td>\n 11.5% (N =\u00a0 10)<\/jats:td>\n 88.5%(N =\u00a0 77)<\/jats:td>\n 1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Age<\/jats:td>\n 39.9 (28.4\u201351.4) (N =\u00a0 10)<\/jats:td>\n 45.3(42.8\u201347.8) (N =\u00a0 77)<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Sex<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Male\/ Female<\/jats:td>\n 11.8%(N =\u00a0 9)\/ 9.1%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 88.2%(N =\u00a0 67)\/ 90.9%(N =\u00a0 10)<\/jats:td>\n 1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Ethnicity<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Unknown<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 0.001<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n South Asian, Indian<\/jats:td>\n 13.2%(N =\u00a0 7)<\/jats:td>\n 86.8%(N =\u00a0 46)<\/jats:td>\n 0.001<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n MENA<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 0.001<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Qatari<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 10)<\/jats:td>\n 0.001<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n White<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 0.001<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n African<\/jats:td>\n 50%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 50%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 0.001<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Far-Eastern<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 18)<\/jats:td>\n 0.001<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n DM<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Diabetic<\/jats:td>\n 22.2%(N =\u00a0 4)<\/jats:td>\n 77.8%(N =\u00a0 14)<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n HTN<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n HTN<\/jats:td>\n 11.7%(N =\u00a0 7)<\/jats:td>\n 88.3%(N =\u00a0 53)<\/jats:td>\n 0.8<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Cardiac disease<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 6<\/jats:td>\n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Cardiac<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 6)<\/jats:td>\n 0.3<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Smoking<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Smoker<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 0.8<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n GCS preop<\/jats:td>\n 9.2(6.2\u201312.2)(N =\u00a0 10)<\/jats:td>\n 8.03(7.2\u20138.9)(N =\u00a0 77)<\/jats:td>\n 0.4<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n GCS on postop day 1<\/jats:td>\n 10.30(7.7\u201312.9)(N =\u00a0 10)<\/jats:td>\n 7.83(6.9\u20138.7)(N =\u00a0 77)<\/jats:td>\n 0.06<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Pupils preop reactive vs non<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n reactive<\/jats:td>\n 12%(N =\u00a0 10)<\/jats:td>\n 88.0%(N =\u00a0 73)<\/jats:td>\n 1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Unreactive on line only<\/jats:td>\n 0.00%<\/jats:td>\n 100.0%(N =\u00a0 4)<\/jats:td>\n 1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Pupils preop equal vs non<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n equal<\/jats:td>\n 11.9%(N =\u00a0 8)<\/jats:td>\n 88.1%(N =\u00a0 59)<\/jats:td>\n 1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Unequal one line only<\/jats:td>\n 10%(N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 90.0%(N =\u00a0 18)<\/jats:td>\n 1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Pupils postop<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Equal reactive<\/jats:td>\n 13.2%(N =\u00a0 10)<\/jats:td>\n 86.8%(N =\u00a0 66)<\/jats:td>\n 0.4<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Anisocoric<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 11)<\/jats:td>\n 0.4<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n ICH score<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n 0<\/jats:td>\n 33.3%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 66.7%(N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n 1<\/jats:td>\n 14.3%(N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 85.7%(N =\u00a0 12)<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n 2<\/jats:td>\n 17.6%(N =\u00a0 6)<\/jats:td>\n 82.4%(N =\u00a0 28)<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n 3<\/jats:td>\n 3.4%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 96.6%(N =\u00a0 28)<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n 4<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 7)<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n FIM total score<\/jats:td>\n 90.11(67.5\u2013112.7)(N =\u00a0 9)<\/jats:td>\n 54.9(47\u201363.9)(N =\u00a0 63)<\/jats:td>\n 0.006<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n hemisphere<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Right\/Left<\/jats:td>\n 13%(N =\u00a0 6)\/ 9.8%(N =\u00a0 4)<\/jats:td>\n 87%(N =\u00a0 40)\/ 90.2%(N =\u00a0 37)<\/jats:td>\n 0.7<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Location<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Basal ganglia<\/jats:td>\n 7.2%(N =\u00a0 5)<\/jats:td>\n 92.8%(N =\u00a0 64)<\/jats:td>\n 0.04<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Thalamus<\/jats:td>\n 0.00%<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 0.04<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Cortical<\/jats:td>\n 29.4% (N =\u00a0 5)<\/jats:td>\n 70.6% (N =\u00a0 12)<\/jats:td>\n 0.04<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Volume, ml<\/jats:td>\n 57.9(20.1\u201395.8)(N =\u00a0 10)<\/jats:td>\n 59.9(52.6\u201367.2)(N =\u00a0 77)<\/jats:td>\n 0.9<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n MLS, mm<\/jats:td>\n 7.3(6.4\u20138.3)(N =\u00a0 10)<\/jats:td>\n 7.2(6.4\u20137.9)(N =\u00a0 77)<\/jats:td>\n 0.9<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Distance of the closest point to the surface, cm<\/jats:td>\n 0.4(-.02 to (-.8)(N =\u00a0 10)<\/jats:td>\n .9(.8\u20131)(N =\u00a0 77)<\/jats:td>\n 0.009<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n IVH<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Absent<\/jats:td>\n 13.5%(N =\u00a0 7)<\/jats:td>\n 86.5%(N =\u00a0 45)<\/jats:td>\n 0.7<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Present<\/jats:td>\n 8.6%(N =\u00a0 3)<\/jats:td>\n 91.4%(N =\u00a0 32)<\/jats:td>\n 0.7<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Edema<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Mild<\/jats:td>\n 11.8%(N =\u00a0 4)<\/jats:td>\n 88.2%(N =\u00a0 30)<\/jats:td>\n 0.9<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Moderate<\/jats:td>\n 9.5%(N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 90.5%(N =\u00a0 19)<\/jats:td>\n 0.9<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Severe<\/jats:td>\n 12.5%(N =\u00a0 4)<\/jats:td>\n 87.5%(N =\u00a0 28)<\/jats:td>\n 0.9<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Brain stem<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Present<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Hydrocephalus<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Present<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 5)<\/jats:td>\n 1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Uncal herniation<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Present<\/jats:td>\n 18%(N =\u00a0 9)<\/jats:td>\n 82%(N =\u00a0 41)<\/jats:td>\n 0.04<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n MLS postop<\/jats:td>\n 3.4(2.1\u20134.6)(N =\u00a0 10)<\/jats:td>\n 3.7(2.9\u20134.5)(N =\u00a0 76)<\/jats:td>\n 0.8<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Residual volume<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n No residual<\/jats:td>\n 27.8%(N =\u00a0 5)<\/jats:td>\n 72.2%(N =\u00a0 13)<\/jats:td>\n 0.1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Near-total evacuation<\/jats:td>\n 6.9%(N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 93.1%(N =\u00a0 27)<\/jats:td>\n 0.1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n partial evacuation<\/jats:td>\n 9.7%(N =\u00a0 3)<\/jats:td>\n 90.3%(N =\u00a0 28)<\/jats:td>\n 0.1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n no evacuation only decompression<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 8)<\/jats:td>\n 0.1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Edema postop<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Mild<\/jats:td>\n 18.2%(N =\u00a0 6)<\/jats:td>\n 81.8%(N =\u00a0 27)<\/jats:td>\n 0.3<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Moderate<\/jats:td>\n 10% (N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 90.0%(N =\u00a0 18)<\/jats:td>\n 0.3<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Severe<\/jats:td>\n 6.1%(N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 93.9%(N =\u00a0 31)<\/jats:td>\n 0.3<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n IVH postop<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Absent<\/jats:td>\n 14.9%(N =\u00a0 7)<\/jats:td>\n 85.1%(N =\u00a0 40)<\/jats:td>\n 0.3<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Present<\/jats:td>\n 7.7%(N =\u00a0 3)<\/jats:td>\n 92.3%(N =\u00a0 36)<\/jats:td>\n 0.3<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Hydrocephalus postop<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Absent<\/jats:td>\n 12%(N =\u00a0 10)<\/jats:td>\n 88%(N =\u00a0 73)<\/jats:td>\n 1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Present<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 3)<\/jats:td>\n 1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Time from initial CT to surgery<\/jats:td>\n 8.1(-3.6\u201319.8)(N =\u00a0 9)<\/jats:td>\n 13.6(5.9\u201321.2)(N =\u00a0 77)<\/jats:td>\n 0.6<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Type of surgery<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Craniotomy hematoma evacuation<\/jats:td>\n 13.2%(N =\u00a0 9)<\/jats:td>\n 86.8%(N =\u00a0 59)<\/jats:td>\n 0.5<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Craniotomy hematoma evacuation plus decompression<\/jats:td>\n 8.3%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 91.7%(N =\u00a0 11)<\/jats:td>\n 0.5<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Decompression only<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 7)<\/jats:td>\n 0.5<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n ICP<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Present<\/jats:td>\n 20%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 80%(N =\u00a0 4)<\/jats:td>\n 0.5<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n EVD<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n present<\/jats:td>\n 13.3%(N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 86.7%(N =\u00a0 13)<\/jats:td>\n 0.6<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Brain Navigation<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n present<\/jats:td>\n 6.5%(N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 93.5%(N =\u00a0 29)<\/jats:td>\n 0.5<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n <\/jats:tbody>\n <\/jats:table>\n \n \n Categorical variables are presented as a percentage % within each variable, while continuous data are presented as means with 95% confidence interval<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:fn>\n \n N, numbers; CT, computed tomography; IVH, intraventricular hemorrhage; ICP, intracranial pressure; EVD; MLS, midline shift<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:fn>\n <\/jats:table-wrap-foot>\n <\/jats:table-wrap>\n \n Table 2<\/jats:label>\n \n Baseline characteristics based on mortality<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:caption>\n \n \n \n Variables<\/jats:td>\n No mortality<\/jats:td>\n Mortality<\/jats:td>\n P value<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n <\/jats:thead>\n \n \n Total<\/jats:td>\n 92%(N =\u00a0 80)<\/jats:td>\n 8%(N =\u00a0 7)<\/jats:td>\n 1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Age<\/jats:td>\n 44.9 (42.3\u201347.7)(N =\u00a0 80)<\/jats:td>\n 41.1(32.6\u201349.7)(N =\u00a0 7)<\/jats:td>\n 0.4<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Sex<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Male<\/jats:td>\n 92.1%(N =\u00a0 70)<\/jats:td>\n 7.9%(N =\u00a0 6)<\/jats:td>\n 1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Female<\/jats:td>\n 90.9%(N =\u00a0 10)<\/jats:td>\n 9.1%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Ethnicity<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Unknown<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 0.8<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n South Asian, Indian<\/jats:td>\n 94.3%(N =\u00a0 50)<\/jats:td>\n 5.7%(N =\u00a0 3)<\/jats:td>\n 0.8<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Middle-eastern, North Africa<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 0.8<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Qatari<\/jats:td>\n 80%(N =\u00a0 8)<\/jats:td>\n 20%(N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 0.8<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n White<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 0.8<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n African<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 0.8<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Far-eastern<\/jats:td>\n 88.9%(N =\u00a0 16)<\/jats:td>\n 11.1%(N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 0.8<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n DM<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Diabetic<\/jats:td>\n 88.9%(N =\u00a0 16)<\/jats:td>\n 11.1%(N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 0.02<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n HTN<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n HTN<\/jats:td>\n 91.7%(N =\u00a0 55)<\/jats:td>\n 8.3%(N =\u00a0 5)<\/jats:td>\n 0.4<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Cardiac disease<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Cardiac<\/jats:td>\n 83.3%(N =\u00a0 5)<\/jats:td>\n 16.7%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 0.6<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Smoking<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Smoker<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n GCS preop<\/jats:td>\n 8.4(7.6\u20139.2)(N =\u00a0 80)<\/jats:td>\n 5.4(3.4\u20137.5)(N =\u00a0 7)<\/jats:td>\n 0.04<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n GCS postop day 1<\/jats:td>\n 8.5(7.7\u20139.3)(N =\u00a0 80)<\/jats:td>\n 3.9(1.4\u20136.3)(N =\u00a0 7)<\/jats:td>\n 0.002<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Pupils preop reactive vs non<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Reactive<\/jats:td>\n 92.8%(N =\u00a0 77)<\/jats:td>\n 7.2%(N =\u00a0 6)<\/jats:td>\n 0.3<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Unreactive<\/jats:td>\n 75.0%(N =\u00a0 3)<\/jats:td>\n 25.0%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 0.3<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Pupils preop equal vs non<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Equal<\/jats:td>\n 95.5%(N =\u00a0 64)<\/jats:td>\n 4.5%(N =\u00a0 3)<\/jats:td>\n 0.05<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Unequal<\/jats:td>\n 80.0%(N =\u00a0 16)<\/jats:td>\n 20.0%(N =\u00a0 4)<\/jats:td>\n 0.05<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Pupils postop<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Equal reactive<\/jats:td>\n 93.4%(N =\u00a0 71)<\/jats:td>\n 6.6%(N =\u00a0 5)<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Anisocoric<\/jats:td>\n 81.8%(N =\u00a0 9)<\/jats:td>\n 18.2%(N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n ICH score<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n 0<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 3)<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n 1<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 14)<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n 2<\/jats:td>\n 97.1%(N =\u00a0 33)<\/jats:td>\n 2.9%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n 3<\/jats:td>\n 82.8%(N =\u00a0 24)<\/jats:td>\n 17.2%(N =\u00a0 5)<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n 4<\/jats:td>\n 85.7%(N =\u00a0 6)<\/jats:td>\n 14.3%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n FIM total score<\/jats:td>\n 65.77(57.68\u201373.86) (N =\u00a0 65)<\/jats:td>\n 0(N =\u00a0 7)<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Hemisphere<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Right<\/jats:td>\n 91.3%(N =\u00a0 42)<\/jats:td>\n 8.7%(N =\u00a0 4)<\/jats:td>\n 1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Left<\/jats:td>\n 92.7%(N =\u00a0 38)<\/jats:td>\n 7.3%(N =\u00a0 3)<\/jats:td>\n 1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Location<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Basal ganglia<\/jats:td>\n 89.9%(N =\u00a0 62)<\/jats:td>\n 10.1%(N =\u00a0 7)<\/jats:td>\n 0.4<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Thalamus<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 0.4<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Cortical<\/jats:td>\n 100% (N =\u00a0 17)<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 0.4<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Volume, ml<\/jats:td>\n 581(50.3\u201365.8)(N =\u00a0 80)<\/jats:td>\n 78.3(49.7\u2013106.9)(N =\u00a0 7)<\/jats:td>\n 0.1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n MLS, mm<\/jats:td>\n 7.1(6.3\u20137.7)(N =\u00a0 80)<\/jats:td>\n 9(4.2\u201313.8)(N =\u00a0 7)<\/jats:td>\n 0.1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Distance of the closest point to the surface, cm<\/jats:td>\n 0.9(.7\u2013.9)(N =\u00a0 80)<\/jats:td>\n 1(.6\u20131.4)(N =\u00a0 7)<\/jats:td>\n 0.6<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n IVH<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Absent<\/jats:td>\n 96.2%(N =\u00a0 50)<\/jats:td>\n 3.8%(N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 0.1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Present<\/jats:td>\n 85.7%(N =\u00a0 30)<\/jats:td>\n 14.3%(N =\u00a0 5)<\/jats:td>\n 0.1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Edema<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Mild<\/jats:td>\n 91.2%(N =\u00a0 31)<\/jats:td>\n 8.8%(N =\u00a0 3)<\/jats:td>\n 0.9<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Moderate<\/jats:td>\n 90.5%(N =\u00a0 19)<\/jats:td>\n 9.5%(N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 0.9<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Severe<\/jats:td>\n 93.8%(N =\u00a0 30)<\/jats:td>\n 6.3%(N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 0.9<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Brain stem<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Absent<\/jats:td>\n 92.9%(N =\u00a0 79)<\/jats:td>\n 7.1%(N =\u00a0 6)<\/jats:td>\n 0.6<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Present<\/jats:td>\n 50%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 50%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 0.6<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Hydrocephalus<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Absent<\/jats:td>\n 91.5%(N =\u00a0 75)<\/jats:td>\n 8.5%(N =\u00a0 7)<\/jats:td>\n 1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Present<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 5)<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Uncal herniation<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Absent<\/jats:td>\n 97.3%(N =\u00a0 36)<\/jats:td>\n 2.7%(N\u00a0=\u00a01)<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Present<\/jats:td>\n 88%(N =\u00a0 44)<\/jats:td>\n 12%(N =\u00a0 6)<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n MLS postop<\/jats:td>\n 3.3518(2.6857\u20134.0178) (N\u00a0=\u00a080)<\/jats:td>\n 7.7667(2.9619\u201312.0674) (N =\u00a0 6)<\/jats:td>\n 0.001<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Residual volume<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n No residual<\/jats:td>\n 94.4%(N =\u00a0 17)<\/jats:td>\n 5.6%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Near-total evacuation<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 29)<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Partial evacuation<\/jats:td>\n 87.1%(N =\u00a0 27)<\/jats:td>\n 12.9%(N =\u00a0 4)<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n No evacuation only decompression<\/jats:td>\n 87.5%(N =\u00a0 7)<\/jats:td>\n 12.5%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Edema postop<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Mild<\/jats:td>\n 18.2%(N =\u00a0 6)<\/jats:td>\n 81.8% (N =\u00a0 27)<\/jats:td>\n 0.3<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Moderate<\/jats:td>\n 10.0%(N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 90% (N =\u00a0 18)<\/jats:td>\n 0.3<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Severe<\/jats:td>\n 6.1%(N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 93.9%(N =\u00a0 31)<\/jats:td>\n 0.3<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n IVH postop<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Absent<\/jats:td>\n 97.9%(N =\u00a0 46)<\/jats:td>\n 2.1%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 0.1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Present<\/jats:td>\n 87.2%(N =\u00a0 34)<\/jats:td>\n 12.8%(N =\u00a0 5)<\/jats:td>\n 0.1<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Hydrocephalus postop<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Absent<\/jats:td>\n 94%(N =\u00a0 78)<\/jats:td>\n 6%(N =\u00a0 5)<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Present<\/jats:td>\n 66.7%(N =\u00a0 2)<\/jats:td>\n 33.3%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Time from the initial CT to surgery<\/jats:td>\n 13.854(6.370\u201321.339) (N =\u00a0 79)<\/jats:td>\n 3.071(1.779\u20134.364) (N =\u00a0 7)<\/jats:td>\n 0.4<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Type of surgery<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Craniotomy hematoma evacuation<\/jats:td>\n 89.7%(N =\u00a0 61)<\/jats:td>\n 10.3%(N =\u00a0 7)<\/jats:td>\n 0.4<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Craniotomy hematoma evacuation plus decompression<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 12)<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 0.4<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Decompression alone<\/jats:td>\n 100%(N =\u00a0 7)<\/jats:td>\n 0<\/jats:td>\n 0.4<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n ICP<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Absent<\/jats:td>\n 92.7%(N =\u00a0 76)<\/jats:td>\n 7.3%(N =\u00a0 6)<\/jats:td>\n 0.4<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Present<\/jats:td>\n 80%(N =\u00a0 4)<\/jats:td>\n 20%(N =\u00a0 1)<\/jats:td>\n 0.4<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n EVD<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Absent<\/jats:td>\n 94.4%(N =\u00a0 67)<\/jats:td>\n 5.6%(N =\u00a0 4)<\/jats:td>\n 0.06<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Present<\/jats:td>\n 80%(N =\u00a0 12)<\/jats:td>\n 20%(N =\u00a0 3)<\/jats:td>\n 0.06<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Brain navigation<\/jats:td>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Absent<\/jats:td>\n 94.6%(N =\u00a0 53)<\/jats:td>\n 5.4% (N =\u00a0 3)<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n Present<\/jats:td>\n 87.1%(N =\u00a0 27)<\/jats:td>\n 12.9% (N =\u00a0 4)<\/jats:td>\n 0.2<\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n \n \n \n <\/jats:td>\n <\/jats:tr>\n <\/jats:tbody>\n <\/jats:table>\n \n \n Categorical variables are presented as a percentage % within each variable, while continuous data are presented as means with confidence interval 95%<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:fn>\n \n N, numbers; CT, computed tomography; IVH, intraventricular hemorrhage; ICP, intracranial pressure; EVD; MLS, midline shift<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:fn>\n <\/jats:table-wrap-foot>\n <\/jats:table-wrap>\n <\/jats:p>\n Conclusion: The preoperative clinical neurological status as well as mass effect (uncal herniation and midline shift) can be determinants of functional outcome and mortality. A deeper hematoma may result in poor functional outcome because of more surgical damage in functional brain tissues. Thus, the goal of surgery in spontaneous supratentorial ICH is to reduce mortality, but no evidence support that it can improve functional outcome. Although our findings are interesting, more prospective studies with a larger sample size are needed to confirm our results.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.5339\/qmj.2021.53","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2021,11,26]],"date-time":"2021-11-26T10:30:49Z","timestamp":1637922649000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":1,"title":["Retrospective analysis of the surgical management of spontaneous supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhage: A single-center study"],"prefix":"10.5339","volume":"2021","author":[{"given":"Ahmed","family":"Shaaban","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Neurosurgery, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar. E-mail: ashaaban4@hamad.qa"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Maher","family":"Saqqur","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Ahmed","family":"Saleh","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Neurosurgery, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar. E-mail: ashaaban4@hamad.qa"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Alaaeldin","family":"Ahmed","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Neurosurgery, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar. E-mail: ashaaban4@hamad.qa"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Hussain","family":"Hussain","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Neurosurgery, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar. E-mail: ashaaban4@hamad.qa"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Arun","family":"Babu R","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Neurosurgery, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar. E-mail: ashaaban4@hamad.qa"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Abdulnasser","family":"Alyafai","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Neurosurgery, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar. E-mail: ashaaban4@hamad.qa"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Sirajeddin","family":"Belkhair","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Ali","family":"Ayyad","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"3277","reference":[{"issue":"(7):","key":"CIT0001","series-title":"Stroke","first-page":"2032\u201360","article-title":"Guidelines for the Management of Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Guideline for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association\/American Stroke Association","volume":"46","year":"2015;"},{"issue":"(1)","key":"CIT0002","series-title":"Neurohospitalist","first-page":"148\u201359","article-title":"Update in intracerebral hemorrhage","volume":"2011","year":"2011;"},{"issue":"(24)","key":"CIT0003","series-title":"Critical Care","first-page":"45","article-title":"Surgery for spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage","volume":"2020","year":"2020;"},{"issue":"(9457):","key":"CIT0004","series-title":"Lancet","first-page":"387\u201397","article-title":"Early surgery versus initial conservative treatment in patients with spontaneous supratentorial intracerebral haematomas in the International Surgical Trial in Intracerebral Haemorrhage (STICH): a randomised trial","volume":"365","year":"2005;"},{"issue":"(382)","key":"CIT0005","series-title":"The Lancet","first-page":"397\u2013408","article-title":"Early surgery versus initial conservative treatment in patients with spontaneous supratentorial lobar intracerebral haematomas (STICH II): a randomised trial","volume":"2013","year":"2013;"},{"issue":"128:","key":"CIT0006","series-title":"Clinical neurology and neurosurgery","first-page":"117\u201322","article-title":"Decompressive hemicraniectomy with or without clot evacuation for large spontaneous supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhages","year":"2015;"},{"issue":"(15)","key":"CIT0007","series-title":"Lancet Neurol","first-page":"1228\u201337","article-title":"Safety and efficacy of minimally invasive surgery plus alteplase in intracerebral haemorrhage evacuation (MISTIE): a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 2 trial","volume":"2016","year":"2016;"},{"issue":"(10175):","key":"CIT0008","series-title":"Lancet","first-page":"1021\u201332","article-title":"Efficacy and safety of minimally invasive surgery with thrombolysis in intracerebral haemorrhage evacuation (MISTIE III): a randomised, controlled, open-label, blinded endpoint phase 3 trial","volume":"393","year":"2019;"},{"issue":"105:","key":"CIT0009","series-title":"Acta neurochirurgica Supplement","first-page":"147\u201351","article-title":"Preliminary findings of the minimally-invasive surgery plus rtPA for intracerebral hemorrhage evacuation (MISTIE) clinical trial","year":"2008;"},{"issue":"(42)","key":"CIT0010","series-title":"Stroke","first-page":"3009\u201316","article-title":"Low-dose recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator enhances clot resolution in brain hemorrhage: the intraventricular hemorrhage thrombolysis trial","volume":"2011","year":"2011;"},{"issue":"(115)","key":"CIT0011","series-title":"Journal of neurosurgery","first-page":"592\u2013601","article-title":"Minimally invasive evacuation of spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage using sonothrombolysis","volume":"2011","year":"2011;"},{"issue":"(8)","key":"CIT0012","series-title":"International journal of stroke: official journal of the International Stroke Society","first-page":"388\u201396","article-title":"Design of a prospective, dose-escalation study evaluating the Safety of Pioglitazone for Hematoma Resolution in Intracerebral Hemorrhage (SHRINC)","volume":"2013","year":"2013;"},{"issue":"50:","key":"CIT0013","series-title":"Journal of clinical neuroscience: official journal of the Neurosurgical Society of Australasia","first-page":"208\u201313","article-title":"Comparison of craniotomy and decompressive craniectomy in large supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhage","year":"2018;"},{"issue":"(36)","key":"CIT0014","series-title":"Stroke","first-page":"1594\u20136","article-title":"The Deleterious or Beneficial Effects of Different Agents in Intracerebral Hemorrhage","volume":"2005","year":"2005;"},{"issue":"(5)","key":"CIT0015","series-title":"The Lancet Neurology","first-page":"53\u201363","article-title":"Mechanisms of brain injury after intracerebral haemorrhage","volume":"2006","year":"2006;"},{"issue":"(49)","key":"CIT0016","series-title":"Stroke","first-page":"2612\u201320","article-title":"Minimally Invasive Surgery for Intracerebral Hemorrhage","volume":"2018","year":"2018;"},{"issue":"(10)","key":"CIT0017","series-title":"Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery","first-page":"771\u20136","article-title":"The Stereotactic Intracerebral Hemorrhage Underwater Blood Aspiration (SCUBA) technique for minimally invasive endoscopic intracerebral hemorrhage evacuation","volume":"2018","year":"2018;"},{"issue":"(76)","key":"CIT0018","series-title":"Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry","first-page":"349\u201353","article-title":"Admission blood glucose and short term survival in primary intracerebral haemorrhage: a population based study","volume":"2005","year":"2005;"},{"issue":"(1-2):","key":"CIT0019","series-title":"Journal of the neurological sciences","first-page":"90\u20134","article-title":"Hyperglycemia independently increases the risk of early death in acute spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage","volume":"255","year":"2007;"},{"issue":"37:","key":"CIT0020","series-title":"Frontiers of neurology and neuroscience","first-page":"148\u201354","article-title":"Surgical Craniotomy for Intracerebral Haemorrhage","year":"2015;"},{"issue":"(43)","key":"CIT0021","series-title":"Stroke","first-page":"1496\u2013504","article-title":"Individual patient data subgroup meta-analysis of surgery for spontaneous supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhage","volume":"2012","year":"2012;"},{"issue":"(7):","key":"CIT0001","series-title":"Stroke","first-page":"2032\u201360","article-title":"Guidelines for the Management of Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Guideline for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association\/American Stroke Association","volume":"46","year":"2015;"},{"issue":"(1)","key":"CIT0002","series-title":"Neurohospitalist","first-page":"148\u201359","article-title":"Update in intracerebral hemorrhage","volume":"2011","year":"2011;"},{"issue":"(24)","key":"CIT0003","series-title":"Critical Care","first-page":"45","article-title":"Surgery for spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage","volume":"2020","year":"2020;"},{"issue":"(9457):","key":"CIT0004","series-title":"Lancet","first-page":"387\u201397","article-title":"Early surgery versus initial conservative treatment in patients with spontaneous supratentorial intracerebral haematomas in the International Surgical Trial in Intracerebral Haemorrhage (STICH): a randomised trial","volume":"365","year":"2005;"},{"issue":"(382)","key":"CIT0005","series-title":"The Lancet","first-page":"397\u2013408","article-title":"Early surgery versus initial conservative treatment in patients with spontaneous supratentorial lobar intracerebral haematomas (STICH II): a randomised trial","volume":"2013","year":"2013;"},{"issue":"128:","key":"CIT0006","series-title":"Clinical neurology and neurosurgery","first-page":"117\u201322","article-title":"Decompressive hemicraniectomy with or without clot evacuation for large spontaneous supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhages","year":"2015;"},{"issue":"(15)","key":"CIT0007","series-title":"Lancet Neurol","first-page":"1228\u201337","article-title":"Safety and efficacy of minimally invasive surgery plus alteplase in intracerebral haemorrhage evacuation (MISTIE): a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 2 trial","volume":"2016","year":"2016;"},{"issue":"(10175):","key":"CIT0008","series-title":"Lancet","first-page":"1021\u201332","article-title":"Efficacy and safety of minimally invasive surgery with thrombolysis in intracerebral haemorrhage evacuation (MISTIE III): a randomised, controlled, open-label, blinded endpoint phase 3 trial","volume":"393","year":"2019;"},{"issue":"105:","key":"CIT0009","series-title":"Acta neurochirurgica Supplement","first-page":"147\u201351","article-title":"Preliminary findings of the minimally-invasive surgery plus rtPA for intracerebral hemorrhage evacuation (MISTIE) clinical trial","year":"2008;"},{"issue":"(42)","key":"CIT0010","series-title":"Stroke","first-page":"3009\u201316","article-title":"Low-dose recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator enhances clot resolution in brain hemorrhage: the intraventricular hemorrhage thrombolysis trial","volume":"2011","year":"2011;"},{"issue":"(115)","key":"CIT0011","series-title":"Journal of neurosurgery","first-page":"592\u2013601","article-title":"Minimally invasive evacuation of spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage using sonothrombolysis","volume":"2011","year":"2011;"},{"issue":"(8)","key":"CIT0012","series-title":"International journal of stroke: official journal of the International Stroke Society","first-page":"388\u201396","article-title":"Design of a prospective, dose-escalation study evaluating the Safety of Pioglitazone for Hematoma Resolution in Intracerebral Hemorrhage (SHRINC)","volume":"2013","year":"2013;"},{"issue":"50:","key":"CIT0013","series-title":"Journal of clinical neuroscience: official journal of the Neurosurgical Society of Australasia","first-page":"208\u201313","article-title":"Comparison of craniotomy and decompressive craniectomy in large supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhage","year":"2018;"},{"issue":"(36)","key":"CIT0014","series-title":"Stroke","first-page":"1594\u20136","article-title":"The Deleterious or Beneficial Effects of Different Agents in Intracerebral Hemorrhage","volume":"2005","year":"2005;"},{"issue":"(5)","key":"CIT0015","series-title":"The Lancet Neurology","first-page":"53\u201363","article-title":"Mechanisms of brain injury after intracerebral haemorrhage","volume":"2006","year":"2006;"},{"issue":"(49)","key":"CIT0016","series-title":"Stroke","first-page":"2612\u201320","article-title":"Minimally Invasive Surgery for Intracerebral Hemorrhage","volume":"2018","year":"2018;"},{"issue":"(10)","key":"CIT0017","series-title":"Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery","first-page":"771\u20136","article-title":"The Stereotactic Intracerebral Hemorrhage Underwater Blood Aspiration (SCUBA) technique for minimally invasive endoscopic intracerebral hemorrhage evacuation","volume":"2018","year":"2018;"},{"issue":"(76)","key":"CIT0018","series-title":"Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry","first-page":"349\u201353","article-title":"Admission blood glucose and short term survival in primary intracerebral haemorrhage: a population based study","volume":"2005","year":"2005;"},{"issue":"(1-2):","key":"CIT0019","series-title":"Journal of the neurological sciences","first-page":"90\u20134","article-title":"Hyperglycemia independently increases the risk of early death in acute spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage","volume":"255","year":"2007;"},{"issue":"37:","key":"CIT0020","series-title":"Frontiers of neurology and neuroscience","first-page":"148\u201354","article-title":"Surgical Craniotomy for Intracerebral Haemorrhage","year":"2015;"},{"issue":"(43)","key":"CIT0021","series-title":"Stroke","first-page":"1496\u2013504","article-title":"Individual patient data subgroup meta-analysis of surgery for spontaneous supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhage","volume":"2012","year":"2012;"}],"container-title":["Qatar Medical Journal"],"original-title":[],"link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.qscience.com\/view\/journals\/qmj\/2021\/3\/article-53.xml","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/www.qscience.com\/downloadpdf\/journals\/qmj\/2021\/3\/article-53.xml","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"syndication"},{"URL":"https:\/\/www.qscience.com\/downloadpdf\/journals\/qmj\/2021\/3\/article-53.xml","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,27]],"date-time":"2026-04-27T17:20:58Z","timestamp":1777310458000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.qscience.com\/view\/journals\/qmj\/2021\/3\/article-53.xml"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2021,10,18]]},"references-count":42,"journal-issue":{"issue":"3"},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.5339\/qmj.2021.53","relation":{},"ISSN":["2227-0426"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2227-0426","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2021,10,18]]}}}