Suppr超能文献

颈动脉血运重建术中颅内动脉瘤破裂的风险。

Risk of intracerebral aneurysm rupture during carotid revascularization.

机构信息

Academic Section of Vascular Surgery, Imperial College London, Charing Cross Hospital, London, United Kingdom.

出版信息

J Vasc Surg. 2012 Dec;56(6):1739-47. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2012.07.027.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Robust guidelines exist for the treatment of carotid stenosis and intracranial aneurysms independently, however, the management of tandem carotid stenosis and intracranial aneurysms remains uncertain. Although the prevalence of tandem pathologies is small (1.9%-3.2%), treating carotid stenosis can alter intracranial hemodynamics potentially predisposing to aneurysm rupture. In this review, our aim was to assess the safety of intervention in this cohort, by analyzing outcomes from the published literature.

METHODS

The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used to conduct the review. Articles from 1947 to 2012 were searched using EMBASE Classic and EMBASE (November, 1947 -March, 2012) and Ovid MEDLINE(R) In-Process and other NonIndexed Citations and Ovid MEDLINE(R) on Ovid SP, http://ClinicalTrials.gov, http://controlled-trials.com and the Cochrane review database using a predefined search strategy.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-one patients from 27 articles were included. Interventions ranged from single (n=104, 74%), staged (n=26, 18%) to simultaneous procedures (n=11, 8%). The largest cohort of patients was treated by carotid endarterectomy alone (n=92, 66%). The majority of patients presented with a symptomatic carotid stenosis and an asymptomatic ipsilateral intracranial aneurysm (n=70, 50%). Five subarachnoid hemorrhages occurred (4% [5/140], three within 30 days of the procedure and two thereafter) of which two were fatal. All five occurred in patients who underwent carotid endarterectomy as a single procedure (5%). Two of the five patients presented with ruptured posterior communicating artery aneurysms.

CONCLUSIONS

Published reports of perioperative aneurysm rupture are rare in individuals with tandem carotid stenosis and intracranial aneurysms. This is the first analysis of all published cases. However, it is limited by the small number of studies and the possible underreporting due to publication bias and underdiagnosis where angiography was not performed. Although we report a low incidence of subarachnoid hemorrhage, analysis of registry data with a larger cohort is warranted to confirm these findings.

摘要

目的

尽管颈动脉狭窄和颅内动脉瘤的治疗指南已经非常完善,但对于串联性颈动脉狭窄和颅内动脉瘤的治疗仍存在争议。尽管串联性病变的发病率较低(1.9%-3.2%),但治疗颈动脉狭窄可能会改变颅内血流动力学,从而增加动脉瘤破裂的风险。在本综述中,我们旨在通过分析已发表文献中的结果来评估该患者群体中干预治疗的安全性。

方法

本研究采用系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南进行综述。通过 EMBASE Classic 和 EMBASE(1947 年 11 月至 2012 年 3 月)以及 Ovid MEDLINE(R)In-Process 和其他非索引引文和 Ovid MEDLINE(R)在 Ovid SP 上进行文献检索,并使用预定义的搜索策略检索来自 27 篇文章的 141 名患者的资料。

结果

27 篇文章共纳入 141 名患者。干预措施包括单一手术(n=104,74%)、分期手术(n=26,18%)和同期手术(n=11,8%)。最大的患者队列接受了单纯颈动脉内膜切除术治疗(n=92,66%)。大多数患者为有症状的颈动脉狭窄和同侧无症状颅内动脉瘤(n=70,50%)。5 例患者发生蛛网膜下腔出血(4%[5/140],3 例发生在手术 30 天内,2 例发生在术后),其中 2 例死亡。这 5 例均发生在单纯行颈动脉内膜切除术的患者中(5%)。其中 2 例患者为后交通动脉瘤破裂。

结论

在串联性颈动脉狭窄和颅内动脉瘤患者中,围手术期动脉瘤破裂的报道很少见。这是对所有已发表病例的首次分析。然而,由于研究数量较少以及可能存在的发表偏倚和未行血管造影导致的漏诊,该研究结果可能存在一定的局限性。尽管我们报告蛛网膜下腔出血的发生率较低,但仍需要对注册数据进行更大队列的分析以确认这些发现。

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