Suppr超能文献

一项关于颈动脉夹层危险因素的系统评价。

A systematic review of the risk factors for cervical artery dissection.

作者信息

Rubinstein Sidney M, Peerdeman Saskia M, van Tulder Maurits W, Riphagen Ingrid, Haldeman Scott

机构信息

Institute for Research in Extramural Medicine, Vrije University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Stroke. 2005 Jul;36(7):1575-80. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000169919.73219.30. Epub 2005 Jun 2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Cervical artery dissection (CAD) is a recognized cause of ischemic stroke among young and middle-aged individuals. The pathogenesis of dissections is unknown, although numerous constitutional and environmental risk factors have been postulated. To better understand the quality and nature of the research on the pathogenesis of CAD, we performed a systematic review of its risk factors.

METHODS

PubMed [MEDLINE (1966 to February 22, 2005)] and Embase (1980 to February 22, 2005) were searched to identify studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria. Two reviewers independently assessed methodological quality of the primary studies. Relevant data were extracted, including the risk factor(s) investigated, characteristics of the study population, and strength of the association(s).

RESULTS

Thirty-one case-control studies were included for analysis. Selection bias, lack of control for confounding, and inadequate method of data analysis were the most common identified methodological shortcomings. Strong associations were reported from individual studies for the following risk factors: aortic root diameter >34 mm (odds ratio [OR=14.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.2 to 63.6), migraine (ORadj, 3.6; 95% CI, 1.5 to 8.6), relative diameter change (>11.8%) during the cardiac cycle of the common carotid artery (ORadj, 10.0; 95% CI, 1.8 to 54.2), and trivial trauma (in the form of manipulative therapy of the neck) (ORadj, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.3 to 11). A weak association was found for homocysteine (2 studies: ORcrude, unknown; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.52; ORcrude, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0 to 1.7), and recent infection (ORadj, 1.60; 95% CI, 0.67 to 3.80). Two studies had conflicting findings for low levels of alpha1-antitrypsin, with the methodologically stronger study suggesting no association with CAD.

CONCLUSIONS

CAD is a multi-factorial disease. Many of the reviewed studies contained 2 or more major sources of bias commonly found in case-control studies. Only one study (of homocysteine) used healthy controls, a robust sample size, and had a low risk of biased results. The relationship between atherosclerosis and CAD has been insufficiently examined.

摘要

背景与目的

颈动脉夹层(CAD)是中青年缺血性卒中的一个公认病因。尽管已提出众多体质和环境危险因素,但夹层的发病机制尚不清楚。为了更好地了解CAD发病机制研究的质量和性质,我们对其危险因素进行了系统评价。

方法

检索PubMed[医学索引数据库(1966年至2005年2月22日)]和Embase(1980年至2005年2月22日),以识别符合纳入标准的研究。两名评价者独立评估原始研究的方法学质量。提取相关数据,包括所研究的危险因素、研究人群的特征以及关联强度。

结果

纳入31项病例对照研究进行分析。选择偏倚、未控制混杂因素以及数据分析方法不充分是最常见的已识别方法学缺陷。个别研究报告了以下危险因素的强关联:主动脉根部直径>34mm(比值比[OR]=14.2;95%置信区间[CI],3.2至63.6)、偏头痛(校正OR,3.6;95%CI,1.5至8.6)、颈总动脉心动周期中相对直径变化(>11.8%)(校正OR,10.0;95%CI,1.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验