Suppr超能文献

颅内动脉瘤的弹簧圈栓塞术:一项基于证据的分析。

Coil embolization for intracranial aneurysms: an evidence-based analysis.

出版信息

Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2006;6(1):1-114. Epub 2006 Jan 1.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of coil embolization compared with surgical clipping to treat intracranial aneurysms.

THE TECHNOLOGY

Endovascular coil embolization is a percutaneous approach to treat an intracranial aneurysm from within the blood vessel without the need of a craniotomy. In this procedure, a microcatheter is inserted into the femoral artery near the groin and navigated to the site of the aneurysm. Small helical platinum coils are deployed through the microcatheter to fill the aneurysm, and prevent it from further expansion and rupture. Health Canada has approved numerous types of coils and coil delivery systems to treat intracranial aneurysms. The most favoured are controlled detachable coils. Coil embolization may be used with other adjunct endovascular devices such as stents and balloons.

BACKGROUND

INTRACRANIAL ANEURYSMS: Intracranial aneurysms are the dilation or ballooning of part of a blood vessel in the brain. Intracranial aneurysms range in size from small (<12 mm in diameter) to large (12-25 mm), and to giant (>25 mm). There are 3 main types of aneurysms. Fusiform aneurysms involve the entire circumference of the artery; saccular aneurysms have outpouchings; and dissecting aneurysms have tears in the arterial wall. Berry aneurysms are saccular aneurysms with well-defined necks. Intracranial aneurysms may occur in any blood vessel of the brain; however, they are most commonly found at the branch points of large arteries that form the circle of Willis at the base of the brain. In 85% to 95% of patients, they are found in the anterior circulation. Aneurysms in the posterior circulation are less frequent, and are more difficult to treat surgically due to inaccessibility. Most intracranial aneurysms are small and asymptomatic. Large aneurysms may have a mass effect, causing compression on the brain and cranial nerves and neurological deficits. When an intracranial aneurysm ruptures and bleeds, resulting in a subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), the mortality rate can be 40% to 50%, with severe morbidity of 10% to 20%. The reported overall risk of rupture is 1.9% per year and is higher for women, cigarette smokers, and cocaine users, and in aneurysms that are symptomatic, greater than 10 mm in diameter, or located in the posterior circulation. If left untreated, there is a considerable risk of repeat hemorrhage in a ruptured aneurysm that results in increased mortality. In Ontario, intracranial aneurysms occur in about 1% to 4% of the population, and the annual incidence of SAH is about 10 cases per 100,000 people. In 2004-2005, about 660 intracranial aneurysm repairs were performed in Ontario. TREATMENT OF INTRACRANIAL ANEURYSMS: Treatment of an unruptured aneurysm attempts to prevent the aneurysm from rupturing. The treatment of a ruptured intracranial aneurysm aims to prevent further hemorrhage. There are 3 approaches to treating an intracranial aneurysm. Small, asymptomatic aneurysms less than 10 mm in diameter may be monitored without any intervention other than treatment for underlying risk factors such as hypertension. Open surgical clipping, involves craniotomy, brain retraction, and placement of a silver clip across the neck of the aneurysm while a patient is under general anesthesia. This procedure is associated with surgical risks and neurological deficits. Endovascular coil embolization, introduced in the 1990s, is the health technology under review.

METHODS

The Medical Advisory Secretariat searched the International Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) Database and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews to identify relevant systematic reviews. OVID Medline, Medline In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, and Embase were searched for English-language journal articles that reported primary data on the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of treatments for intracranial aneurysms, obtained in a clinical setting or analyses of primary data maintained in registers or institutional databases. Internet searches of Medscape and manufacturers' databases were conducted to identify product information and recent reports on trials that were unpublished but that were presented at international conferences. Four systematic reviews, 3 reports on 2 randomized controlled trials comparing coil embolization with surgical clipping of ruptured aneurysms, 30 observational studies, and 3 economic analysis reports were included in this review.

RESULTS

SAFETY AND EFFECTIVENESS: Coil embolization appears to be a safe procedure. Complications associated with coil embolization ranged from 8.6% to 18.6% with a median of about 10.6%. Observational studies showed that coil embolization is associated with lower complication rates than surgical clipping (permanent complication 3-7% versus 10.9%; overall 23% versus 46% respectively, p=0.009). Common complications of coil embolization are thrombo-embolic events (2.5%-14.5%), perforation of aneurysm (2.3%-4.7%), parent artery obstruction (2%-3%), collapsed coils (8%), coil malposition (14.6%), and coil migration (0.5%-3%). Randomized controlled trials showed that for ruptured intracranial aneurysms with SAH, suitable for both coil embolization and surgical clipping (mostly saccular aneurysms <10 mm in diameter located in the anterior circulation) in people with good clinical condition:Coil embolization resulted in a statistically significant 23.9% relative risk reduction and 7% absolute risk reduction in the composite rate of death and dependency compared to surgical clipping (modified Rankin score 3-6) at 1-year. The advantage of coil embolization over surgical clipping varies widely with aneurysm location, but endovascular treatment seems beneficial for all sites. There were less deaths in the first 7 years following coil embolization compared to surgical clipping (10.8% vs 13.7%). This survival benefit seemed to be consistent over time, and was statistically significant (log-rank p= 0.03). Coil embolization is associated with less frequent MRI-detected superficial brain deficits and ischemic lesions at 1-year. The 1- year rebleeding rate was 2.4% after coil embolization and 1% for surgical clipping. Confirmed rebleeding from the repaired aneurysm after the first year and up to year eight was low and not significantly different between coil embolization and surgical clipping (7 patients for coil embolization vs 2 patients for surgical clipping, log-rank p=0.22). Observational studies showed that patients with SAH and good clinical grade had better 6-month outcomes and lower risk of symptomatic cerebral vasospasm after coil embolization compared to surgical clipping. For unruptured intracranial aneurysms, there were no randomized controlled trials that compared coil embolization to surgical clipping. Large observational studies showed that: The risk of rupture in unruptured aneurysms less than 10 mm in diameter is about 0.05% per year for patients with no pervious history of SAH from another aneurysm. The risk of rupture increases with history of SAH and as the diameter of the aneurysm reaches 10 mm or more. Coil embolization reduced the composite rate of in hospital deaths and discharge to long-term or short-term care facilities compared to surgical clipping (Odds Ratio 2.2, 95% CI 1.6-3.1, p<0.001). The improvement in discharge disposition was highest in people older than 65 years. In-hospital mortality rate following treatment of intracranial aneurysm ranged from 0.5% to 1.7% for coil embolization and from 2.1% to 3.5% for surgical clipping. The overall 1-year mortality rate was 3.1% for coil embolization and 2.3% for surgical clipping. One-year morbidity rate was 6.4% for coil embolization and 9.8% for surgical clipping. It is not clear whether these differences were statistically significant. Coil embolization is associated with shorter hospital stay compared to surgical clipping. For both ruptured and unruptured aneurysms, the outcome of coil embolization does not appear to be dependent on age, whereas surgical clipping has been shown to yield worse outcome for patients older than 64 years. ANGIOGRAPHIC EFFICIENCY AND RECURRENCES: The main drawback of coil embolization is its low angiographic efficiency. The percentage of complete aneurysm occlusion after coil embolization (27%-79%, median 55%) remains lower than that achieved with surgical clipping (82%-100%). However, about 90% of coiled aneurysms achieve near total occlusion or better. Incompletely coiled aneurysms have been shown to have higher aneurysm recurrence rates ranging from 7% to 39% for coil embolization compared to 2.9% for surgical clipping. Recurrence is defined as refilling of the neck, sac, or dome of a successfully treated aneurysm as shown on an angiogram. The long-term clinical significance of incomplete occlusion following coil embolization is unknown, but in one case series, 20% of patients had major recurrences, and 50% of these required further treatment. LONG-TERM OUTCOMES: A large international randomized trial reported that the survival benefit from coil embolization was sustained for at least 7 years. The rebleeding rate between year 2 and year 8 following coil embolization was low and not significantly different from that of surgical clipping. However, high quality long-term angiographic evidence is lacking. Accordingly, there is uncertainty about long-term occlusion status, coil durability, and recurrence rates. While surgical clipping is associated with higher immediate procedural risks, its long-term effectiveness has been established. INDICATIONS AND CONTRAINDICATIONS: Coil embolization offers treatment for people at increased risk for craniotomy, such as those over 65 years of age, with poor clinical status, or with comorbid conditions. The technology also makes it possible to treat surgical high-risk aneurysms. Not all aneurysms are suitable for coil embolization. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)

摘要

目的

确定与外科夹闭术相比,弹簧圈栓塞术治疗颅内动脉瘤的有效性和成本效益。

技术

血管内弹簧圈栓塞术是一种经皮治疗颅内动脉瘤的方法,无需开颅手术,从血管内部进行操作。在此手术中,将微导管插入腹股沟附近的股动脉,并引导至动脉瘤部位。通过微导管部署小的螺旋铂铱合金弹簧圈以填充动脉瘤,防止其进一步扩张和破裂。加拿大卫生部已批准多种类型的弹簧圈和弹簧圈输送系统用于治疗颅内动脉瘤。最常用的是可控解脱弹簧圈。弹簧圈栓塞术可与其他辅助血管内装置如支架和球囊一起使用。

背景

颅内动脉瘤:颅内动脉瘤是指脑内部分血管的扩张或膨出。颅内动脉瘤大小不一,从小型(直径<12mm)到大型(12 - 25mm),再到巨型(>25mm)。动脉瘤主要有三种类型。梭形动脉瘤累及动脉的整个圆周;囊状动脉瘤有囊袋状突出;夹层动脉瘤动脉壁有撕裂。浆果状动脉瘤是颈部清晰的囊状动脉瘤。颅内动脉瘤可发生于脑内任何血管;然而,它们最常见于构成脑底部Willis环的大动脉分支点处。85%至95%的患者动脉瘤位于前循环。后循环中的动脉瘤较少见,且由于难以接近,手术治疗更困难。大多数颅内动脉瘤较小且无症状。大型动脉瘤可能产生占位效应,压迫脑和颅神经并导致神经功能缺损。当颅内动脉瘤破裂出血,导致蛛网膜下腔出血(SAH)时,死亡率可达40%至50%,严重致残率为10%至20%。据报道,动脉瘤每年的破裂总风险为1.9%,女性、吸烟者、可卡因使用者以及有症状、直径大于10mm或位于后循环的动脉瘤破裂风险更高。如果不进行治疗,破裂动脉瘤再次出血的风险相当高,会导致死亡率增加。在安大略省,约1%至4%的人口患有颅内动脉瘤,SAH的年发病率约为每10万人10例。2004 - 2005年,安大略省约进行了660例颅内动脉瘤修复手术。颅内动脉瘤的治疗:未破裂动脉瘤的治疗旨在防止动脉瘤破裂。破裂颅内动脉瘤的治疗旨在防止进一步出血。治疗颅内动脉瘤有三种方法。直径小于10mm的小型无症状动脉瘤,除治疗高血压等潜在危险因素外,可进行监测而无需任何干预。开放性外科夹闭术需要开颅手术,在全身麻醉下牵开脑组织,并在动脉瘤颈部放置银夹。此手术存在手术风险和神经功能缺损。20世纪90年代引入的血管内弹簧圈栓塞术是本综述所评估的卫生技术。

方法

医学咨询秘书处检索了国际卫生技术评估(INAHTA)数据库和Cochrane系统评价数据库,以识别相关的系统评价。检索了OVID Medline、Medline在研及其他未索引文献以及Embase,查找在临床环境中获得的、或在登记册或机构数据库中保存的主要数据的英文期刊文章,这些文章报告了颅内动脉瘤治疗有效性或成本效益的主要数据。通过互联网搜索Medscape和制造商数据库,以识别产品信息以及关于未发表但在国际会议上展示的试验的最新报告。本综述纳入了四项系统评价、三篇关于两项比较破裂动脉瘤弹簧圈栓塞术与外科夹闭术的随机对照试验的报告、30项观察性研究以及三份经济分析报告。

结果

安全性和有效性:弹簧圈栓塞术似乎是一种安全的手术。与弹簧圈栓塞术相关的并发症发生率在8.6%至18.6%之间,中位数约为10.6%。观察性研究表明,弹簧圈栓塞术的并发症发生率低于外科夹闭术(永久性并发症分别为3 - 7%和10.9%;总体分别为23%和46%,p = 0.009)。弹簧圈栓塞术的常见并发症包括血栓栓塞事件(2.5% - 14.5%)、动脉瘤穿孔(2.3% - 4.7%)、载瘤动脉阻塞(2% - 3%)、弹簧圈塌陷(8%)、弹簧圈位置不当(14.6%)以及弹簧圈移位(0.5% - 3%)。随机对照试验表明,对于伴有SAH的破裂颅内动脉瘤,临床状况良好、适合弹簧圈栓塞术和外科夹闭术(大多为前循环中直径<10mm的囊状动脉瘤)的患者:与外科夹闭术相比,弹簧圈栓塞术在1年时使死亡和依赖的综合发生率相对风险显著降低23.9%,绝对风险降低7%(改良Rankin评分3 - 6)。弹簧圈栓塞术相对于外科夹闭术的优势因动脉瘤位置而异,但血管内治疗似乎对所有部位都有益。与外科夹闭术相比,弹簧圈栓塞术后7年内死亡人数较少(10.8%对13.7%)。这种生存获益似乎随时间持续存在,且具有统计学意义(对数秩检验p = 0.03)。弹簧圈栓塞术在1年时与MRI检测到的浅表脑功能缺损和缺血性病变发生率较低相关。弹簧圈栓塞术后1年再出血率为2.4%,外科夹闭术为1%。在第一年至第八年期间,修复后的动脉瘤确诊再出血率较低,弹簧圈栓塞术和外科夹闭术之间无显著差异(弹簧圈栓塞术7例,外科夹闭术2例,对数秩检验p = 0.22)。观察性研究表明,与外科夹闭术相比,SAH且临床分级良好的患者在弹簧圈栓塞术后6个月预后更好,有症状的脑血管痉挛风险更低。对于未破裂颅内动脉瘤,没有随机对照试验比较弹簧圈栓塞术和外科夹闭术。大型观察性研究表明:对于无其他动脉瘤SAH病史的患者,直径小于10mm的未破裂动脉瘤每年破裂风险约为0.05%。随着SAH病史的增加以及动脉瘤直径达到10mm或更大,破裂风险增加。与外科夹闭术相比,弹簧圈栓塞术降低了住院死亡和转至长期或短期护理机构的综合发生率(优势比2.2,95%可信区间1.6 - 3.1,p < 0.001)。65岁以上人群出院情况的改善最为明显。颅内动脉瘤治疗后的住院死亡率,弹簧圈栓塞术为0.5%至1.7%,外科夹闭术为2.1%至3.5%。总体1年死亡率,弹簧圈栓塞术为3.1%,外科夹闭术为2.3%。1年发病率,弹簧圈栓塞术为6.4%,外科夹闭术为9.8%。尚不清楚这些差异是否具有统计学意义。与外科夹闭术相比,弹簧圈栓塞术住院时间更短。对于破裂和未破裂的动脉瘤,弹簧圈栓塞术的预后似乎不依赖于年龄,而外科夹闭术已显示对于64岁以上患者预后较差。血管造影效率和复发率:弹簧圈栓塞术的主要缺点是其血管造影效率低。弹簧圈栓塞术后动脉瘤完全闭塞的百分比(27% - 79%,中位数55%)仍低于外科夹闭术(82% - 100%)。然而,约90%的弹簧圈栓塞动脉瘤实现了近乎完全闭塞或更好的效果。与外科夹闭术的2.9%相比,弹簧圈栓塞术不完全栓塞的动脉瘤复发率较高,为7%至39%。复发定义为血管造影显示成功治疗的动脉瘤颈部、囊袋或瘤顶再次充盈。弹簧圈栓塞术后不完全闭塞的长期临床意义尚不清楚,但在一个病例系列中,20%的患者有严重复发,其中50%需要进一步治疗。长期预后:一项大型国际随机试验报告,弹簧圈栓塞术的生存获益至少持续7年。弹簧圈栓塞术后第2年至第8年的再出血率较低,与外科夹闭术无显著差异。然而,缺乏高质量的长期血管造影证据。因此,关于长期闭塞状态、弹簧圈耐久性和复发率存在不确定性。虽然外科夹闭术与更高的即时手术风险相关,但其长期有效性已得到证实。适应证和禁忌证:弹簧圈栓塞术为开颅手术风险增加的患者提供了治疗方法,如65岁以上、临床状况差或有合并症的患者。该技术还使治疗手术高风险动脉瘤成为可能。并非所有动脉瘤都适合弹簧圈栓塞术。(摘要截断)

相似文献

7
The Barrow Ruptured Aneurysm Trial: 6-year results.巴罗破裂动脉瘤试验:6年结果。
J Neurosurg. 2015 Sep;123(3):609-17. doi: 10.3171/2014.9.JNS141749. Epub 2015 Jun 26.

引用本文的文献

10
Biophysical targeting of high-risk cerebral aneurysms.高危脑动脉瘤的生物物理靶向治疗
Bioeng Transl Med. 2021 Sep 16;7(1):e10251. doi: 10.1002/btm2.10251. eCollection 2022 Jan.

本文引用的文献

1
Embolization of non-ruptured aneurysms.未破裂动脉瘤的栓塞治疗
Interv Neuroradiol. 1999 Nov;5 Suppl 1:93-6. doi: 10.1177/15910199990050S117. Epub 2001 May 15.
2
Endovascular treatment of unruptured vertebro-basilar aneurysms.未破裂椎基底动脉瘤的血管内治疗
Interv Neuroradiol. 1999 Nov;5 Suppl 1:83-8. doi: 10.1177/15910199990050S115. Epub 2001 May 15.

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