单独使用分流器与静脉分流器联合血管盘绕治疗颅内大动脉瘤的比较:观察性研究的系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 4.3 1区 医学 Q1 NEUROIMAGING Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery Pub Date : 2026-02-16 DOI:10.1136/jnis-2024-022845
Rahim Abo Kasem, Zachary Hubbard, Conor Cunningham, Hani Almorawed, Julio Isidor, Imad Samman Tahhan, Mohammad-Mahdi Sowlat, Sofia Babool, Layal Abodest, Alejandro M Spiotta
{"title":"单独使用分流器与静脉分流器联合血管盘绕治疗颅内大动脉瘤的比较:观察性研究的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Rahim Abo Kasem, Zachary Hubbard, Conor Cunningham, Hani Almorawed, Julio Isidor, Imad Samman Tahhan, Mohammad-Mahdi Sowlat, Sofia Babool, Layal Abodest, Alejandro M Spiotta","doi":"10.1136/jnis-2024-022845","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Large and giant intracranial aneurysms pose treatment challenges. The benefit-risk balance of flow diverters (FDs) alone versus FDs with coiling remains unclear. This study aimed to compare these two strategies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science was performed up to October 2024. Studies comparing FDs with or without adjunctive coiling in large/giant intracranial aneurysms were included. The primary outcome was complete aneurysm occlusion, defined by the Raymond-Roy Occlusion Classification. Additional outcomes included procedural and postprocedural complications. Data were analyzed using a random effects model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>15 studies with 1130 patients were analyzed, with 557 in the FD alone group and 573 in the FD+coiling group. The meta-analysis revealed that FD+coiling significantly improved complete aneurysm occlusion rates (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.40, P=0.03). While overall ischemic complications were significantly lower in the FD alone group, a sensitivity analysis showed no significant difference (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.23, P=0.13). Subgroup analysis of fusiform aneurysms showed no significant difference in complete aneurysm occlusion rates (OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.50 to 2.40, P=0.82). Procedural and hemorrhagic complications did not differ significantly, and no publication bias was detected in the results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Combining FDs with coiling improved complete aneurysm occlusion rates in large and giant saccular intracranial aneurysms, although the impact on complications remains controversial. Further investigation into the benefit-risk ratio of this combined approach is warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":16411,"journal":{"name":"Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"739-749"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of flow diverter alone versus flow diverter with coiling for large and giant intracranial aneurysms: systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.\",\"authors\":\"Rahim Abo Kasem, Zachary Hubbard, Conor Cunningham, Hani Almorawed, Julio Isidor, Imad Samman Tahhan, Mohammad-Mahdi Sowlat, Sofia Babool, Layal Abodest, Alejandro M Spiotta\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/jnis-2024-022845\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Large and giant intracranial aneurysms pose treatment challenges. The benefit-risk balance of flow diverters (FDs) alone versus FDs with coiling remains unclear. This study aimed to compare these two strategies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science was performed up to October 2024. Studies comparing FDs with or without adjunctive coiling in large/giant intracranial aneurysms were included. The primary outcome was complete aneurysm occlusion, defined by the Raymond-Roy Occlusion Classification. Additional outcomes included procedural and postprocedural complications. Data were analyzed using a random effects model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>15 studies with 1130 patients were analyzed, with 557 in the FD alone group and 573 in the FD+coiling group. The meta-analysis revealed that FD+coiling significantly improved complete aneurysm occlusion rates (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.40, P=0.03). While overall ischemic complications were significantly lower in the FD alone group, a sensitivity analysis showed no significant difference (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.23, P=0.13). Subgroup analysis of fusiform aneurysms showed no significant difference in complete aneurysm occlusion rates (OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.50 to 2.40, P=0.82). Procedural and hemorrhagic complications did not differ significantly, and no publication bias was detected in the results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Combining FDs with coiling improved complete aneurysm occlusion rates in large and giant saccular intracranial aneurysms, although the impact on complications remains controversial. Further investigation into the benefit-risk ratio of this combined approach is warranted.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16411,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"739-749\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-02-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/jnis-2024-022845\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROIMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jnis-2024-022845","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROIMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:大而巨大的颅内动脉瘤给治疗带来了挑战。单独使用分流器(FDs)与使用分流器(FDs)的收益-风险平衡尚不清楚。本研究旨在比较这两种策略。方法:本系统评价和荟萃分析遵循系统评价和荟萃分析指南的首选报告项目。对PubMed、Embase、Scopus、Cochrane和Web of Science进行了全面的检索,截止到2024年10月。比较大/巨大颅内动脉瘤的FDs有无辅助卷绕的研究也包括在内。主要结果是完全动脉瘤闭塞,由Raymond-Roy闭塞分类法定义。其他结果包括手术和术后并发症。数据分析采用随机效应模型。结果:共分析了15项研究共1130例患者,其中单独FD组557例,FD+卷曲组573例。荟萃分析显示,FD+卷曲可显著提高动脉瘤完全闭塞率(OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.06 ~ 2.40, P=0.03)。虽然单独使用FD组总的缺血性并发症明显降低,但敏感性分析显示差异无统计学意义(OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.20 ~ 1.23, P=0.13)。梭状动脉瘤的亚组分析显示,完全动脉瘤闭塞率差异无统计学意义(OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.50 ~ 2.40, P=0.82)。手术并发症和出血性并发症没有显著差异,结果中没有发现发表偏倚。结论:FDs联合卷绕可提高大、巨型囊状颅内动脉瘤的完全闭塞率,但对并发症的影响仍存在争议。进一步调查这种联合方法的收益风险比是有必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Comparison of flow diverter alone versus flow diverter with coiling for large and giant intracranial aneurysms: systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

Background: Large and giant intracranial aneurysms pose treatment challenges. The benefit-risk balance of flow diverters (FDs) alone versus FDs with coiling remains unclear. This study aimed to compare these two strategies.

Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science was performed up to October 2024. Studies comparing FDs with or without adjunctive coiling in large/giant intracranial aneurysms were included. The primary outcome was complete aneurysm occlusion, defined by the Raymond-Roy Occlusion Classification. Additional outcomes included procedural and postprocedural complications. Data were analyzed using a random effects model.

Results: 15 studies with 1130 patients were analyzed, with 557 in the FD alone group and 573 in the FD+coiling group. The meta-analysis revealed that FD+coiling significantly improved complete aneurysm occlusion rates (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.40, P=0.03). While overall ischemic complications were significantly lower in the FD alone group, a sensitivity analysis showed no significant difference (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.23, P=0.13). Subgroup analysis of fusiform aneurysms showed no significant difference in complete aneurysm occlusion rates (OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.50 to 2.40, P=0.82). Procedural and hemorrhagic complications did not differ significantly, and no publication bias was detected in the results.

Conclusions: Combining FDs with coiling improved complete aneurysm occlusion rates in large and giant saccular intracranial aneurysms, although the impact on complications remains controversial. Further investigation into the benefit-risk ratio of this combined approach is warranted.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.50
自引率
14.60%
发文量
291
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery (JNIS) is a leading peer review journal for scientific research and literature pertaining to the field of neurointerventional surgery. The journal launch follows growing professional interest in neurointerventional techniques for the treatment of a range of neurological and vascular problems including stroke, aneurysms, brain tumors, and spinal compression.The journal is owned by SNIS and is also the official journal of the Interventional Chapter of the Australian and New Zealand Society of Neuroradiology (ANZSNR), the Canadian Interventional Neuro Group, the Hong Kong Neurological Society (HKNS) and the Neuroradiological Society of Taiwan.
期刊最新文献
Venous sinus stent placement is associated with improvement in volumetric skull base thickness. Intraprocedural lactation support for neurointerventional surgery. Impact of intravenous thrombolysis on aspiration thrombectomy outcomes: an Imperative Trial subgroup analysis. Superior petrosal sinus dural arteriovenous fistulas: endovascular treatment strategies with special emphasis on transvenous route selection. Balloon guide catheters improve first-pass effect and neurologic outcomes in mechanical thrombectomy: a matched cohort analysis.
×
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学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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