Langwieser Nicolas, Buyer Dominique, Schuster Tibor, Haller Bernhard, Laugwitz Karl-Ludwig, Ibrahim Tareq
1 I. Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik and.
J Endovasc Ther. 2014 Oct;21(5):683-92. doi: 10.1583/14-4713MR.1.
To compare through meta-analysis the use of drug-eluting stents (DES) vs. bare metal stents (BMS) in the treatment of extracranial vertebral artery (EVA) disease.
A literature search of the PubMed database was conducted to identify English-language articles in which both BMS and DES stenting were performed for EVA stenosis by the same investigator(s). Further, eligible studies had to provide data on in-stent restenosis during follow-up. The search identified 9 nonrandomized studies that met the inclusion criteria. The random effects model was employed to pool data. Meta-regression analyses were performed to evaluate the relationships between risk of restenosis and the age of patients, the length of follow-up, or the percentage of male patients.
Reported technical success was high (range 99.2%-100%) and comparable for BMS [100% (276/276)] and DES [99.4% (166/167)]. The use of DES was associated with significantly lower (p<0.0001) overall restenosis rates [8.2% (14/170) over follow-up periods averaging 16 to 43 months] compared to BMS [23.7% (68/287) over mean follow-up periods of 19 to 46 months]. Moreover, DES showed significantly lower symptomatic restenosis rates as compared to BMS [4.7% (8/169) for DES vs. 11.6% (32/275) for BMS; p=0.005]. There was no change in the risk of restenosis for any factor explored in the meta-regression analysis.
This meta-analysis demonstrates that the use of DES for extracranial vertebral artery stenting significantly reduces both the rate of restenosis and recurrence of symptoms as compared to BMS. In future, randomized trials are needed to support these findings.
通过荟萃分析比较药物洗脱支架(DES)与裸金属支架(BMS)在治疗颅外椎动脉(EVA)疾病中的应用。
对PubMed数据库进行文献检索,以识别由同一研究者对EVA狭窄同时进行BMS和DES支架置入术的英文文章。此外,符合条件的研究必须提供随访期间支架内再狭窄的数据。检索确定了9项符合纳入标准的非随机研究。采用随机效应模型汇总数据。进行荟萃回归分析以评估再狭窄风险与患者年龄、随访时间或男性患者百分比之间的关系。
报告的技术成功率很高(范围为99.2%-100%),BMS[100%(276/276)]和DES[99.4%(166/167)]相当。与BMS相比,DES的使用与总体再狭窄率显著降低(p<0.0001)相关[在平均16至43个月的随访期内为8.2%(14/170)],而BMS在平均19至46个月的随访期内为23.7%(68/287)。此外与BMS相比,DES的症状性再狭窄率显著更低[DES为4.7%(8/169),BMS为11.6%(32/275);p=0.005]。荟萃回归分析中探讨的任何因素均未改变再狭窄风险。
这项荟萃分析表明,与BMS相比,使用DES进行颅外椎动脉支架置入术可显著降低再狭窄率和症状复发率。未来需要进行随机试验来支持这些发现。