• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

血管内支架置入术或颈动脉内膜切除术治疗颈动脉狭窄:荟萃分析。

Endovascular stenting or carotid endarterectomy for treatment of carotid stenosis: a meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology, University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

出版信息

J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2011 Dec;25(6):1024-9. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2011.01.009. Epub 2011 Mar 12.

DOI:10.1053/j.jvca.2011.01.009
PMID:21398144
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare carotid artery stenting with open carotid surgery for the treatment of symptomatic or asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis in terms of stroke, myocardial infarction, and death at 30 days.

DESIGN

A meta-analysis of parallel randomized clinical trials (RCTs) (blind or open) published (full article available) in English.

SETTING

University-based electronic search.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were submitted to carotid artery stenting or open carotid artery surgery.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Ten RCTs including 6,950 patients were found. There was a moderate amount of heterogeneity (I(2) = 49.8%) in stroke at 30 days when all available data were added together. Heterogeneity fell to 0% when only studies (n = 4) in which cerebral protection devices were used in a high percentage of the patients in the stenting groups were retained. Those 4 studies included 5,012 patients. Carotid endarterectomy reduced the risk ratio (RR) of stroke at 30 days compared with stenting (RR = 0.50; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.38-0.67; p = 0.000002; event rate 2.8% and 5.6%). Carotid endarterectomy increases the risk of myocardial infarction (RR = 2.16 [95% CI, 1.32-3.54], p = 0.002, heterogeneity 0%, event rate 1.8% and 0.9%). There was no difference in death at 30 days (RR = 0.72 [0.42-1.24] (random effects model), p = 0.23, I(2) = 2.45%, p value for heterogeneity = 0.41; event rate 0.7% and 1.1% for carotid endarterectomy and stenting, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with stenting, carotid endarterectomy decreases the risk of stroke at 30 days, increases the risk of myocardial infarction, and does not affect the risk of death.

摘要

目的

比较颈动脉支架置入术与颈动脉内膜切除术治疗症状性或无症状性颈动脉狭窄在 30 天内的卒中、心肌梗死和死亡。

设计

对发表的(可获得全文)平行随机临床试验(RCT)(盲法或开放)进行的荟萃分析。

环境

以大学为基础的电子搜索。

干预措施

患者接受颈动脉支架置入术或颈动脉内膜切除术。

测量和主要结果

共发现 10 项 RCT,包括 6950 例患者。当所有可用数据合并在一起时,30 天内卒中存在中度异质性(I²=49.8%)。当仅保留支架组中使用脑保护装置的患者比例较高的 4 项研究(n=5012 例)时,异质性降为 0%。与支架置入术相比,颈动脉内膜切除术降低了 30 天内卒中的风险比(RR)(RR=0.50;95%置信区间[CI],0.38-0.67;p=0.000002;事件发生率为 2.8%和 5.6%)。颈动脉内膜切除术增加了心肌梗死的风险(RR=2.16[95%CI,1.32-3.54],p=0.002,异质性 0%,事件发生率为 1.8%和 0.9%)。30 天内死亡率无差异(RR=0.72[0.42-1.24](随机效应模型),p=0.23,I²=2.45%,p 值为异质性=0.41;事件发生率分别为颈动脉内膜切除术和支架置入术的 0.7%和 1.1%)。

结论

与支架置入术相比,颈动脉内膜切除术降低了 30 天内卒中的风险,增加了心肌梗死的风险,但不影响死亡风险。

相似文献

1
Endovascular stenting or carotid endarterectomy for treatment of carotid stenosis: a meta-analysis.血管内支架置入术或颈动脉内膜切除术治疗颈动脉狭窄:荟萃分析。
J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2011 Dec;25(6):1024-9. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2011.01.009. Epub 2011 Mar 12.
2
Safety of endovascular treatment of carotid artery stenosis compared with surgical treatment: a meta-analysis.颈动脉狭窄血管内治疗与手术治疗安全性的比较:一项荟萃分析。
J Vasc Surg. 2008 Feb;47(2):350-5. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2007.10.035.
3
Long-term results of carotid stenting versus endarterectomy in high-risk patients.高危患者中颈动脉支架置入术与内膜切除术的长期结果
N Engl J Med. 2008 Apr 10;358(15):1572-9. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0708028.
4
Carotid angioplasty with or without stenting versus carotid endarterectomy for carotid artery stenosis: a meta-analysis.颈动脉血管成形术(伴或不伴支架置入)与颈动脉内膜切除术治疗颈动脉狭窄的比较:一项荟萃分析。
J Neurol Sci. 2008 Jul 15;270(1-2):40-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jns.2008.01.012. Epub 2008 Mar 4.
5
Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing the Long-Term Outcomes of Carotid Artery Stenting Versus Endarterectomy.比较颈动脉支架置入术与动脉内膜切除术长期疗效的随机对照试验的Meta分析
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2015 Oct;8(6 Suppl 3):S99-108. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.115.001933.
6
Protected carotid-artery stenting versus endarterectomy in high-risk patients.高危患者中颈动脉支架置入术与颈动脉内膜切除术的比较
N Engl J Med. 2004 Oct 7;351(15):1493-501. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa040127.
7
Carotid endarterectomy plus medical therapy or medical therapy alone for carotid artery stenosis in symptomatic or asymptomatic patients: a meta-analysis.颈动脉内膜切除术联合药物治疗与单纯药物治疗用于症状性或无症状性颈动脉狭窄患者:一项荟萃分析。
J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2012 Oct;26(5):835-44. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2012.01.044. Epub 2012 Apr 10.
8
Carotid artery stenting vs. endarterectomy.颈动脉支架置入术与颈动脉内膜切除术的比较。
Eur Heart J. 2009 Nov;30(22):2693-704. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehp471. Epub 2009 Oct 27.
9
Outcomes of carotid artery stenting in high-risk patients with carotid artery stenosis: a single neurovascular center retrospective review of 101 consecutive patients.颈动脉狭窄高危患者颈动脉支架置入术的结果:单神经血管中心 101 例连续患者的回顾性研究。
Neurosurgery. 2010 Mar;66(3):448-53; discussion 453-4. doi: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000365008.17803.AD.
10
Meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing carotid endarterectomy and endovascular treatment.比较颈动脉内膜切除术和血管内治疗的随机试验的荟萃分析。
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2007 Oct;34(4):470-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2007.06.001. Epub 2007 Aug 1.

引用本文的文献

1
Efficacy and safety of stenting for elderly patients with severe and symptomatic carotid artery stenosis: a critical meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.老年重度症状性颈动脉狭窄患者支架置入术的疗效与安全性:随机对照试验的关键荟萃分析
Clin Interv Aging. 2015 Oct 28;10:1733-42. doi: 10.2147/CIA.S91721. eCollection 2015.
2
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Carotid Artery Stenting Versus Endarterectomy for Carotid Stenosis: A Chronological and Worldwide Study.颈动脉支架置入术与颈动脉内膜切除术治疗颈动脉狭窄的系统评价和Meta分析:一项按时间顺序的全球研究。
Medicine (Baltimore). 2015 Jul;94(26):e1060. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000001060.
3
Cardiac damage after carotid intervention: a meta-analysis after a decade of randomized trials.
颈动脉介入术后的心脏损伤:十年随机试验后的荟萃分析。
J Anesth. 2014 Dec;28(6):866-72. doi: 10.1007/s00540-014-1843-5. Epub 2014 May 15.
4
Carotid stenosis management: a review for the internist.颈动脉狭窄的管理:内科医生综述
Intern Emerg Med. 2014 Mar;9(2):133-42. doi: 10.1007/s11739-013-1005-z. Epub 2013 Sep 21.