A meta-analysis of Lateral supraorbital vs mini Pterional approach in the outcome of rupture and unruptured noncomplex aneurysms’ surgery

George Fotakopoulos , Hugo Andrade-Barazarte , Brotis Alexandros , Juha Hernesniemi
{"title":"A meta-analysis of Lateral supraorbital vs mini Pterional approach in the outcome of rupture and unruptured noncomplex aneurysms’ surgery","authors":"George Fotakopoulos ,&nbsp;Hugo Andrade-Barazarte ,&nbsp;Brotis Alexandros ,&nbsp;Juha Hernesniemi","doi":"10.1016/j.neucie.2022.11.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span><span>To determine the characteristics and to compare the functional outcomes and safety of different subfrontal approaches versus mini Pterional (MPT) approaches mainly for the treatment of ruptured noncomplex </span>intracranial aneurysms<span>. This meta-analysis included articles comparing outcomes of brain aneurysms (BAs) – most for the anterior circulation–, using Lateral supraorbital &amp; Supraorbital keyhole (LSO) versus MPT approach. There were six articles left into the final article pool and the total number of patients was 683 (322 in LSO and 361 in the MPT group). In terms of the early and late time of surgery, the LSO seems to be superior over the MPT approach but with heterogeneity (OR −0.21, CI 95% −0.59 to 0.18, and </span></span><em><strong>p</strong></em> <strong>=</strong> <strong>0.04</strong>) or (OR −0.21, CI 95% −0.69 to 0.28, and <em><strong>p</strong></em> <strong>=</strong> <strong>0.05</strong>), and (<em>p</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.02 and <em>I</em><sup>2</sup> <!-->=<!--> <!-->68.97%) or (<em>p</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.05 and <em>I</em><sup>2</sup> <!-->=<!--> <span><span>61.74%) respectively. Regarding the subgroup of patients with the supra-early time of surgery, surgical duration, completed occlusion, technical intraoperative complications, </span>postoperative infection<span><span>, intraoperative rupture, vasospasm, good and poor neurological outcomes and clinical deterioration, there was no superiority of the one method over the other. Mini or keyhole </span>craniotomy even challenging might be a good option for neurosurgeons. Particularly in ruptured noncomplex aneurysms’ surgery LSO seems to be superior over the MPT approach in terms of the early time and in the late time of surgery but with heterogeneity.</span></span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":74273,"journal":{"name":"Neurocirugia (English Edition)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurocirugia (English Edition)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2529849622000788","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

To determine the characteristics and to compare the functional outcomes and safety of different subfrontal approaches versus mini Pterional (MPT) approaches mainly for the treatment of ruptured noncomplex intracranial aneurysms. This meta-analysis included articles comparing outcomes of brain aneurysms (BAs) – most for the anterior circulation–, using Lateral supraorbital & Supraorbital keyhole (LSO) versus MPT approach. There were six articles left into the final article pool and the total number of patients was 683 (322 in LSO and 361 in the MPT group). In terms of the early and late time of surgery, the LSO seems to be superior over the MPT approach but with heterogeneity (OR −0.21, CI 95% −0.59 to 0.18, and p = 0.04) or (OR −0.21, CI 95% −0.69 to 0.28, and p = 0.05), and (p = 0.02 and I2 = 68.97%) or (p = 0.05 and I2 = 61.74%) respectively. Regarding the subgroup of patients with the supra-early time of surgery, surgical duration, completed occlusion, technical intraoperative complications, postoperative infection, intraoperative rupture, vasospasm, good and poor neurological outcomes and clinical deterioration, there was no superiority of the one method over the other. Mini or keyhole craniotomy even challenging might be a good option for neurosurgeons. Particularly in ruptured noncomplex aneurysms’ surgery LSO seems to be superior over the MPT approach in terms of the early time and in the late time of surgery but with heterogeneity.

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
眶上外侧入路与小翼点入路对破裂和未破裂非复杂动脉瘤手术结果的荟萃分析
确定主要用于治疗破裂的非复合性颅内动脉瘤的不同额下入路与微型Pterional(MPT)入路的特征,并比较其功能结果和安全性。这项荟萃分析包括比较脑动脉瘤(BA)的结果的文章,其中大多数是前循环,使用眶上外侧动脉瘤;眶上锁孔(LSO)与MPT入路。最后的文章库中有6篇文章,患者总数为683人(LSO组322人,MPT组361人)。就手术的早期和晚期而言,LSO似乎优于MPT方法,但分别具有异质性(OR−0.21,CI 95%−0.59至0.18,p=0.04)或(OR−0.21,CI 95%–0.69至0.28,p=0.05)、(p=0.02和I2=68.97%)或(p=0.05和I2=61.74%)。关于具有超早期手术时间、手术持续时间、完全闭塞、术中技术并发症、术后感染、术中破裂、血管痉挛、神经系统良好和不良结果以及临床恶化的患者亚组,一种方法并不优于另一种方法。对于神经外科医生来说,微创或锁孔开颅术可能是一个很好的选择,即使是有挑战性的。特别是在破裂的非复杂动脉瘤的手术中,就手术的早期和晚期而言,LSO似乎优于MPT方法,但具有异质性。
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
Relationship between optic nerve length and interoptic angle in the prediction of optic chiasm location. Epidemiological aspects of syringomyelia in a 19-year old cohort of spinal cord injury patients. Mortality risk factors for adult trauma patients treated with halo brace for cervical spine fracture. Endovascular treatment of chronic subdural hematoma in a dual-trained neurosurgical unit: Results and proposal of a randomized controlled trial protocol. Cervical spine spondylodiscitis due to neglected esophageal perforation after a dilation procedure 30 years after a laringectomy and radiotherapy. Report of a case and review of literature.
×
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