Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists for Patients with Conservatively Managed Nontraumatic Subdural Hematoma

Le résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Medical management options for nontraumatic subdural hematoma (SDH) remain limited, with only atorvastatin demonstrating benefit in a single phase 2 randomized clinical trial and mixed evidence for dexamethasone. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) may benefit SDH outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between GLP-1 RA use and rescue surgery rates and mortality in patients with medically managed nontraumatic SDH. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the TriNetX database from 2016 to 2025, including adults with SDH who were managed conservatively without surgical evacuation or middle meningeal artery embolization. Patients prescribed GLP-1 RAs were compared with nonusers. After propensity matching, rescue surgical evacuation, all-cause mortality at 1 year, and GLP-1 RA-associated adverse events were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 134 901 patients with conservatively managed nontraumatic SDH were identified, of whom 1470 (1.1%) were GLP-1 RA users. After propensity score matching, 2922 patients remained, with 1461 in each group. At 1 year, GLP-1 RA users experienced significantly lower rates of rescue surgery (2.23% vs 3.51%; P = .046), culminating in an overall 38% reduction in relative hazard. All-cause mortality was also significantly lower for GLP-1 RA users at 1 year (16.1% vs 23.7%, P < .001), reflecting a 33% reduction in hazards. GLP-1 RA users did not experience different rates of adverse events, such as pancreatitis, gallbladder disease, or ileus/bowel obstruction (all P > .05). CONCLUSION: Among patients with medically managed nontraumatic SDH, GLP-1 RA use was associated with significantly lower rates of rescue surgery and all-cause mortality without significantly increased risk of common GLP-1 RA-related complications.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.