According to the 2023 Guideline for the Management of Patients With Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association (AHA/ASA), preclinical studies initially indicated that magnesium sulfate might enhance cerebral blood flow (CBF) and reduce vasospasm. However, clinical trials have shown no beneficial outcomes when intravenous magnesium sulfate is administered, failing to demonstrate improvements in cerebral infarction rates or mortality reduction. Two meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) similarly found no advantage in these clinical outcomes. Some have hypothesized that the concentration of magnesium in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), rather than in the peripheral circulation, might be crucial, but this theory has not been validated. Consequently, current evidence advises against the routine use of magnesium sulfate to improve neurological outcomes in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). [1]
A 2023 systematic review and meta-analysis undertook an extensive evaluation of the effectiveness of magnesium sulfate in the treatment of cerebral vasospasm and associated complications following aSAH. Researchers conducted a thorough search for RCTs dating up to March 2023 that assessed magnesium sulfate against standard treatments like saline. A total of 16 studies, encompassing 3,503 participants, were incorporated into the analysis, yielding significant findings favoring magnesium sulfate over control treatments. Specifically, the use of magnesium sulfate was associated with a notable reduction in cerebral vasospasm (CV; odds ratio [OR] 0.61, p = 0.04), delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI; OR 0.57, p = 0.01), secondary cerebral infarction (OR = 0.49, p = 0.01), and neurological dysfunction (OR = 0.55, p = 0.04). The pooled data analysis demonstrated that while significant heterogeneity was present across the included studies, sensitivity analyses corroborated the robustness of the results favoring magnesium sulfate for several outcomes. However, no significant differences were observed in terms of mortality (OR = 0.92, p = 0.47) or rebleeding (OR = 0.68, p = 0.55), suggesting potential limitations in detecting effects on these particular outcomes due to sample size constraints. The systematic review underscores magnesium sulfate's potential benefits in mitigating complications such as CV and DCI following aSAH, yet highlights the need for further randomized trials with larger cohorts to validate these findings and explore the nuanced impact on mortality and rebleeding incidents. [2]
A 2011 meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness of magnesium sulfate in improving outcomes for patients with aneurysmal SAH. This comprehensive analysis incorporated data from eight controlled clinical trials, encompassing a total of 936 patients. The patients were treated with intravenous magnesium sulfate, with treatment initiation occurring within a few days following SAH. The administration protocols differed across studies, with dosing ranging from 12 to 48 grams per day and treatment durations extending from 12 to 18 days post-hemorrhage. Magnesium sulfate's potential benefits were assessed against a standardized control group, and the primary outcome measured was the risk of poor functional outcomes at 3 to 6 months post-SAH, defined by severe disability, persistent vegetative state, or death. The meta-analysis found that magnesium sulfate treatment resulted in a 20% relative risk reduction in poor outcomes compared to the control group, indicating a significant potential benefit in functional recovery post-SAH. Despite the promising findings regarding functional outcomes, the meta-analysis revealed no significant impact of magnesium sulfate treatment on mortality rates after SAH. The analysis noted consistent mortality rates between the treatment group and the control group, suggesting that while magnesium sulfate may enhance recovery in terms of functional outcomes, it does not appear to influence overall survival after aneurysmal SAH. The investigators highlighted the need for further studies with larger population sizes and standardized outcomes to refine the understanding of magnesium's role in SAH management. The results of this meta-analysis contribute valuable insight into potential therapeutic strategies for improving patient outcomes following this life-threatening condition. [3]
A 2015 individual patient data meta-analysis assessed the effectiveness of early magnesium sulfate treatment in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). This comprehensive analysis included data from five randomized controlled trials, totaling 1981 patients, to determine if early administration of magnesium sulfate could improve clinical outcomes or reduce delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI). Patients were stratified into four categories based on the timing of the initiation of magnesium treatment: less than 6 hours, 6 to 12 hours, 12 to 24 hours, and more than 24 hours post-SAH. All included trials utilized a continuous infusion approach, while some also added a bolus. The primary outcome measure was poor clinical outcome, defined as death or dependency at 3 to 6 months, while the secondary outcome measure was the occurrence of DCI. The results of the meta-analysis indicated that there was no statistically significant beneficial effect of magnesium treatment on poor clinical outcomes or the occurrence of DCI across the different timing groups. Specifically, the adjusted risk ratios for poor outcomes were 1.44 for magnesium treatment initiated within 6 hours, 1.03 for 6 to 12 hours, 0.84 for 12 to 24 hours, and 1.06 for more than 24 hours. For DCI, the risk ratios were similarly inconclusive, with values of 1.76 for treatment within 6 hours, 2.09 for 6 to 12 hours, 0.80 for 12 to 24 hours, and 1.08 for more than 24 hours. Despite the inclusion of 1981 patients, only 83 were treated within 6 hours of SAH onset, limiting the statistical power to detect a small beneficial effect. Consequently, the meta-analysis provides no justification for further trials focusing on early magnesium treatment after SAH, as it does not support its use in improving outcomes or reducing DCI incidence. [4]