血管内盘绕与显微手术夹持治疗颅内动脉瘤破裂:荟萃分析和系统回顾。

IF 1.7 Q2 Medicine Chinese Neurosurgical Journal Pub Date : 2022-07-25 DOI:10.1186/s41016-022-00283-3
Chao Peng, Yu-Hang Diao, Shi-Fei Cai, Xin-Yu Yang
{"title":"血管内盘绕与显微手术夹持治疗颅内动脉瘤破裂:荟萃分析和系统回顾。","authors":"Chao Peng,&nbsp;Yu-Hang Diao,&nbsp;Shi-Fei Cai,&nbsp;Xin-Yu Yang","doi":"10.1186/s41016-022-00283-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose of this analysis is to evaluate the current evidence with regard to the effectiveness and safety between coiling and clipping in patients with ruptured intracranial aneurysms (RIAs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a meta-analysis that compared clipping with coiling between July 2000 and September 2021. PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for related articles systematically. And the treatment efficacy and postoperative complications were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified three randomized controlled trials and thirty-seven observational studies involving 60,875 patients with ruptured cerebral aneurysms. The summary results showed that coiling was related a better quality of life (mRS0-2; OR=1.327; CI=1.093-1.612; p<0.05), a higher risk of mortality (OR=1.116; CI=1.054-1.180; p<0.05), higher rate of rebleeding (RR=1.410; CI=1.092-1.822; p<0.05), lower incidence of vasospasm (OR=0.787; CI=0.649-0.954; p<0.05), higher risk of hydrocephalous (RR=1.143; CI=1.043-1.252; p<0.05), lower risk of cerebral infarction (RR=0.669; CI=0.596-0.751; p<0.05), lower risk of neuro deficits (RR=0.720; CI=0.582-0.892; p<0.05), and a lower rate of complete occlusion (OR=0.495; CI=0.280-0.876; p<0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Coiling was significantly associated with a better life quality (mRS0-2), a lower incidence of postoperative complications, and a higher rate of mortality, rebleeding, hydrocephalous, and a lower rate of complete occlusion than clipping.</p>","PeriodicalId":36700,"journal":{"name":"Chinese Neurosurgical Journal","volume":" ","pages":"17"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9310462/pdf/","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Endovascular coiling versus microsurgical clipping for ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a meta-analysis and systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Chao Peng,&nbsp;Yu-Hang Diao,&nbsp;Shi-Fei Cai,&nbsp;Xin-Yu Yang\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s41016-022-00283-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose of this analysis is to evaluate the current evidence with regard to the effectiveness and safety between coiling and clipping in patients with ruptured intracranial aneurysms (RIAs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a meta-analysis that compared clipping with coiling between July 2000 and September 2021. PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for related articles systematically. And the treatment efficacy and postoperative complications were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified three randomized controlled trials and thirty-seven observational studies involving 60,875 patients with ruptured cerebral aneurysms. The summary results showed that coiling was related a better quality of life (mRS0-2; OR=1.327; CI=1.093-1.612; p<0.05), a higher risk of mortality (OR=1.116; CI=1.054-1.180; p<0.05), higher rate of rebleeding (RR=1.410; CI=1.092-1.822; p<0.05), lower incidence of vasospasm (OR=0.787; CI=0.649-0.954; p<0.05), higher risk of hydrocephalous (RR=1.143; CI=1.043-1.252; p<0.05), lower risk of cerebral infarction (RR=0.669; CI=0.596-0.751; p<0.05), lower risk of neuro deficits (RR=0.720; CI=0.582-0.892; p<0.05), and a lower rate of complete occlusion (OR=0.495; CI=0.280-0.876; p<0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Coiling was significantly associated with a better life quality (mRS0-2), a lower incidence of postoperative complications, and a higher rate of mortality, rebleeding, hydrocephalous, and a lower rate of complete occlusion than clipping.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36700,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chinese Neurosurgical Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"17\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9310462/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chinese Neurosurgical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41016-022-00283-3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chinese Neurosurgical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41016-022-00283-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

背景:本分析的目的是评估目前关于颅内动脉瘤破裂(RIAs)患者在卷绕和夹持之间的有效性和安全性的证据。方法:我们进行了一项荟萃分析,比较了2000年7月至2021年9月期间的夹钳和卷取。系统检索PubMed、EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆相关文章。并对治疗效果及术后并发症进行分析。结果:我们确定了3项随机对照试验和37项观察性研究,涉及60,875例脑动脉瘤破裂患者。总结结果显示,卷取与较好的生活质量相关(mRS0-2;或= 1.327;CI = 1.093 - -1.612;结论:与夹持术相比,夹持术与更好的生活质量(mRS0-2)、更低的术后并发症发生率、更高的死亡率、再出血、脑积水和更低的完全闭塞率显著相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Endovascular coiling versus microsurgical clipping for ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

Background: The purpose of this analysis is to evaluate the current evidence with regard to the effectiveness and safety between coiling and clipping in patients with ruptured intracranial aneurysms (RIAs).

Methods: We performed a meta-analysis that compared clipping with coiling between July 2000 and September 2021. PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for related articles systematically. And the treatment efficacy and postoperative complications were analyzed.

Results: We identified three randomized controlled trials and thirty-seven observational studies involving 60,875 patients with ruptured cerebral aneurysms. The summary results showed that coiling was related a better quality of life (mRS0-2; OR=1.327; CI=1.093-1.612; p<0.05), a higher risk of mortality (OR=1.116; CI=1.054-1.180; p<0.05), higher rate of rebleeding (RR=1.410; CI=1.092-1.822; p<0.05), lower incidence of vasospasm (OR=0.787; CI=0.649-0.954; p<0.05), higher risk of hydrocephalous (RR=1.143; CI=1.043-1.252; p<0.05), lower risk of cerebral infarction (RR=0.669; CI=0.596-0.751; p<0.05), lower risk of neuro deficits (RR=0.720; CI=0.582-0.892; p<0.05), and a lower rate of complete occlusion (OR=0.495; CI=0.280-0.876; p<0.05).

Conclusion: Coiling was significantly associated with a better life quality (mRS0-2), a lower incidence of postoperative complications, and a higher rate of mortality, rebleeding, hydrocephalous, and a lower rate of complete occlusion than clipping.

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
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
224
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
A comparative analysis of early postoperative outcomes of autologous pericranium versus high-density polypropylene in cranial duraplasty in a tertiary care center in Central India. BBB-aware stimuli-responsive and biomimetic nanomedicines for glioblastoma. Safety and hemodynamic efficacy of the LVIS stent in the endovascular treatment of intracranial wide-necked aneurysms: a single-center retrospective study. Intratumoral hemorrhage in vestibular schwannomas post-radiosurgery: a systematic review. Chinese consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of prolactinomas (2025 edition).
×
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