Siddiqui Fazeel M, Dandapat Sudeepta, Banerjee Chirantan, Zuurbier Susanna M, Johnson Mark, Stam Jan, Coutinho Jonathan M
From the Department of Neurology, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine, Springfield (F.M.S., S.D.); Department of Neurology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX (F.M.S., C.B., M.J.); Department of Neurology, Academic Medical Hospital, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands (S.M.Z., J.S., J.M.C.); and Division of Neuroradiology, Department of Medical Imaging, Toronto Western Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (J.M.C.).
Stroke. 2015 May;46(5):1263-8. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.007465. Epub 2015 Apr 21.
Cerebral venous thrombosis is generally treated with anticoagulation. However, some patients do not respond to medical therapy and these might benefit from mechanical thrombectomy. The aim of this study was to gain a better understanding of the efficacy and safety of mechanical thrombectomy in patients with cerebral venous thrombosis, by performing a systematic review of the literature.
We identified studies published between January 1995 and February 2014 from PubMed and Ovid. We included all cases of cerebral venous thrombosis in whom mechanical thrombectomy was performed with or without intrasinus thrombolysis. Good outcome was defined as normal or mild neurological deficits at discharge (modified Rankin Scale, 0-2). Secondary outcome variables included periprocedural complications and recanalization rates.
Our study included 42 studies (185 patients). Sixty percent of patient had a pretreatment intracerebral hemorrhage and 47% were stuporous or comatose. AngioJet was the most commonly used device (40%). Intrasinus thrombolysis was used in 131 patients (71%). Overall, 156 (84%) patients had a good outcome and 22 (12%) died. Nine (5%) patients had no recanalization, 38 (21%) had partial, and 137 (74%) had near to complete recanalization. The major periprocedural complication was new or increased intracerebral hemorrhage (10%). The use of AngioJet was associated with lower rate of complete recanalization (odds ratio, 0.2; 95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.4) and lower chance of good outcome (odds ratio, 0.5; 95% confidence interval, 0.2-1.0).
Our systematic review suggests that mechanical thrombectomy is reasonably safe but controlled studies are required to provide a definitive answer on its efficacy and safety in patients with cerebral venous thrombosis.
脑静脉血栓形成通常采用抗凝治疗。然而,一些患者对药物治疗无反应,这些患者可能从机械取栓术中获益。本研究的目的是通过对文献进行系统评价,更好地了解机械取栓术治疗脑静脉血栓形成患者的疗效和安全性。
我们从PubMed和Ovid数据库中检索了1995年1月至2014年2月发表的研究。我们纳入了所有接受机械取栓术(无论是否联合窦内溶栓)治疗的脑静脉血栓形成病例。良好结局定义为出院时神经功能缺损正常或轻微(改良Rankin量表,0 - 2分)。次要结局变量包括围手术期并发症和再通率。
我们的研究纳入了42项研究(185例患者)。60%的患者术前有脑出血,47%的患者昏迷或昏睡。AngioJet是最常用的设备(40%)。131例患者(71%)使用了窦内溶栓。总体而言,156例(84%)患者结局良好,22例(12%)死亡。9例(5%)患者未再通,38例(21%)部分再通,137例(74%)接近完全再通。主要围手术期并发症是新发或脑出血增加(10%)。使用AngioJet与完全再通率较低(比值比,0.2;95%置信区间,0.09 - 0.4)和良好结局机会较低(比值比,0.5;95%置信区间,0.2 - 1.0)相关。
我们的系统评价表明,机械取栓术相当安全,但需要进行对照研究以明确其治疗脑静脉血栓形成患者的疗效和安全性。