Evaluating the safety and efficacy of transradial approach for thrombectomy in posterior circulation stroke. A systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

Frederick J A Marlowe, E. Powell
{"title":"Evaluating the safety and efficacy of transradial approach for thrombectomy in posterior circulation stroke. A systematic literature review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Frederick J A Marlowe, E. Powell","doi":"10.1177/15910199221107259","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\nTransradial access (TRA) is becoming more popular in neurointerventional radiology procedures and has been associated with reduced mortality, morbidity and access site complications. Guidelines state that TRA is a feasible option for posterior circulation thrombectomy however the evidence base is limited and no systematic literature review has yet been undertaken to evaluate its safety and efficacy.\n\n\nMETHODS\nThe Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, TRIP and Embase databases were searched. Outcomes collected included TICI scores, puncture to recanalisation time, mRS scores at 90 days and access site complications.\n\n\nRESULTS\n291 records were identified and 31 full text articles were assessed for eligibility. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria and were meta-analysed. The rate of TICI 2b-3 was 94.7% (89.7-99.8% at 95% CI), TICI 3 was 67.9% (42.2-93.6% at 95% CI) and mRS 0-2 at 90 days was 49.8% (31.5-68.1% at 95% CI). Median puncture to reperfusion times were extracted from three studies as 24 (IQR 18-40), 24 (IQR 17.5-56.5) and 27 (IQR 24-33.5) minutes. No access site complications were reported. TICI 2b-3, TICI 3 and mRS scores were comparable to data for transfemoral access (TFA) from a large systematic review. Puncture to recanalisation times appeared lower than the TFA data but statistical comparison of this outcome was not possible.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nThe use of TRA in posterior circulation thrombectomy is safe and effective with comparable results to TFA. Further research with a larger sample size is required to fully investigate the potential for shortened puncture to recanalisation times.","PeriodicalId":126264,"journal":{"name":"Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15910199221107259","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

BACKGROUND Transradial access (TRA) is becoming more popular in neurointerventional radiology procedures and has been associated with reduced mortality, morbidity and access site complications. Guidelines state that TRA is a feasible option for posterior circulation thrombectomy however the evidence base is limited and no systematic literature review has yet been undertaken to evaluate its safety and efficacy. METHODS The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, TRIP and Embase databases were searched. Outcomes collected included TICI scores, puncture to recanalisation time, mRS scores at 90 days and access site complications. RESULTS 291 records were identified and 31 full text articles were assessed for eligibility. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria and were meta-analysed. The rate of TICI 2b-3 was 94.7% (89.7-99.8% at 95% CI), TICI 3 was 67.9% (42.2-93.6% at 95% CI) and mRS 0-2 at 90 days was 49.8% (31.5-68.1% at 95% CI). Median puncture to reperfusion times were extracted from three studies as 24 (IQR 18-40), 24 (IQR 17.5-56.5) and 27 (IQR 24-33.5) minutes. No access site complications were reported. TICI 2b-3, TICI 3 and mRS scores were comparable to data for transfemoral access (TFA) from a large systematic review. Puncture to recanalisation times appeared lower than the TFA data but statistical comparison of this outcome was not possible. CONCLUSIONS The use of TRA in posterior circulation thrombectomy is safe and effective with comparable results to TFA. Further research with a larger sample size is required to fully investigate the potential for shortened puncture to recanalisation times.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
后循环卒中经桡动脉入路取栓的安全性和有效性评价。系统的文献综述和荟萃分析。
背景:经桡骨入路(TRA)在神经介入放射学手术中越来越流行,并与降低死亡率、发病率和入路部位并发症有关。指南指出,TRA是后循环血栓切除术的可行选择,但证据基础有限,尚未进行系统的文献综述来评估其安全性和有效性。方法检索Cochrane Library、PubMed、Web of Science、Scopus、TRIP和Embase数据库。收集的结果包括TICI评分、穿刺到再通时间、90天mRS评分和通路部位并发症。结果共检索到291条记录,31篇全文入选。8项研究符合纳入标准,并进行了meta分析。TICI 2b-3率为94.7% (89.7-99.8%,95% CI), TICI 3率为67.9% (42.2-93.6%,95% CI), 90天mRS 0-2率为49.8% (31.5-68.1%,95% CI)。从三项研究中提取正中穿刺至再灌注时间为24 (IQR 18-40)、24 (IQR 17.5-56.5)和27 (IQR 24-33.5)分钟。无访问部位并发症报告。TICI 2b-3、TICI 3和mRS评分与一项大型系统评价的经股通道(TFA)数据相当。穿刺至再通时间似乎低于TFA数据,但无法对这一结果进行统计比较。结论TRA在后循环取栓术中应用安全有效,效果与TFA相当。进一步的研究需要更大的样本量来充分研究缩短穿刺到再通时间的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Coaxial Method of PTA Balloon and Aspiration catheter using the delivery wire of a stent retriever for tandem occlusion: CoMBAt tandem occlusion. Safety and efficacy of endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke of large-vessel occlusion beyond the time window based on imaging evaluation. FRED X flow diverter for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms: Two-center experience and mini-review of the literature. Safety and efficacy of transvenous embolization of cerebrospinal fluid-venous fistula in patients with spontaneous intracranial hypotension. The resolute Onyx in TIA management (ROTIA).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1