Bakker Nicolaas A, Uyttenboogaart Maarten, Luijckx G J, Eshghi Omid S, Mazuri Aryan, Metzemaekers Jan D M, Groen Rob J M, Van Dijk J Marc C
From the Departments of *Neurosurgery, ‡Radiology, and §Neurology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Neurosurgery. 2015 Jul;77(1):137-44; discussion 144. doi: 10.1227/NEU.0000000000000727.
There is an increasing tendency to treat spinal dural arteriovenous fistulas (SDAVFs) endovascularly despite the lack of clear evidence favoring embolization over surgery.
To compare the initial failure and recurrence rates of primary treatment of SDAVFs by surgery and endovascular techniques.
A meta-analysis using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) standard was performed. All the English literature from 2004 onward was evaluated. From each article that compared the 2 treatment modalities, the odds ratio (OR) was calculated. Combined ORs were calculated with Review Manager 5.3 of The Cochrane Collaboration.
A total of 35 studies harboring 1112 patients were assessed. Initial definitive fistula occlusion was observed in 588 of 609 surgical patients (96.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 94.8-97.8) vs 363 of 503 endovascularly treated patients (72.2%; 95% CI, 68.1-75.9; P < .001). The combined OR from 18 studies that assessed both treatment modalities (730 patients) was 6.15 (95% CI, 3.45-11.0) in favor of surgical treatment. Late recurrence (13 studies, 480 patients) revealed an OR of 3.15 (95% CI, 1.66-5.96; P < .001) in favor of surgery. In a subgroup, recurrence was reported in 10 of 22 patients (45%) treated with Onyx vs 8 of 35 (23%) treated with n-butyle-2-cyanoacrylate (OR, 2.51; 95% CI, 0.75-8.37; P = .13).
Although hampered by inclusion of poor quality studies, this meta-analysis shows a definite advantage of primary surgical treatment of SDAVF over endovascular treatment in initial failure rate and late recurrences. The often-used argument that endovascular techniques have improved and therefore outweigh surgery is not supported by this meta-analysis.
尽管缺乏明确证据表明栓塞术优于手术,但采用血管内治疗脊髓硬脊膜动静脉瘘(SDAVF)的趋势日益增加。
比较手术和血管内技术对SDAVF进行初始治疗的初始失败率和复发率。
采用PRISMA(系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目)标准进行Meta分析。对2004年以后的所有英文文献进行评估。从每篇比较这两种治疗方式的文章中计算比值比(OR)。使用Cochrane协作网的Review Manager 5.3计算合并OR。
共评估了35项研究,纳入1112例患者。609例手术患者中有588例(96.6%;95%置信区间[CI],94.8 - 97.8)实现了初始瘘管完全闭塞,而503例接受血管内治疗的患者中有363例(72.2%;95% CI,68.1 - 75.9;P <.001)。18项评估了两种治疗方式的研究(730例患者)的合并OR为6.15(95% CI,3.45 - 11.0),支持手术治疗。晚期复发(13项研究,480例患者)显示OR为3.15(95% CI,1.66 - 5.96;P <.001),支持手术治疗。在一个亚组中,22例接受Onyx治疗的患者中有10例(45%)出现复发,而35例接受正丁基-2-氰基丙烯酸酯治疗的患者中有8例(23%)出现复发(OR,2.51;95% CI,0.75 - 8.37;P = 0.13)。
尽管受到纳入低质量研究的影响,但该Meta分析显示,在初始失败率和晚期复发方面,SDAVF的初始手术治疗比血管内治疗具有明显优势。血管内技术已有所改进且因此优于手术的这一常用观点未得到该Meta分析的支持。