Suppr超能文献

颈动脉支架置入术中近端栓子保护与远端滤网保护及联合保护的比较:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。

Proximal embolic protection versus distal filter protection versus combined protection in carotid artery stenting: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

作者信息

Texakalidis Pavlos, Letsos Alexandros, Kokkinidis Damianos G, Schizas Dimitrios, Karaolanis Georgios, Giannopoulos Stefanos, Giannopoulos Spyridon, Economopoulos Konstantinos P, Bakoyannis Christos

机构信息

Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece; Society of Junior Doctors, Menalou 5 Street, 15123 Athens, Greece.

University of Crete, Heraklion, Greece; Society of Junior Doctors, Menalou 5 Street, 15123 Athens, Greece.

出版信息

Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2018 Jul;19(5 Pt A):545-552. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2017.12.010. Epub 2017 Dec 27.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Proximal embolic protection devices (P-EPD) and distal filters (DF) are used to prevent distal cerebral embolizations during carotid artery stenting (CAS). We compared their comparative effectiveness in regards to prevention of intraprocedural and periprocedural adverse events, including ischemic lesions (ipsilateral and contralateral), stroke, transient ischemic attacks (TIA) and death. We also compared the combination of the two neuroprotection strategies vs. a single strategy in regards to ischemic lesions and stroke.

MATERIALS & METHODS: This study was performed according to the PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines and eligible studies were identified through search of PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane Central. A meta-analysis was conducted with the use of a random effects model. The I-square statistic was used to assess for heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies involving 16,307 patients were included. There was a significant reduction in ischemic lesions with the use of P-EPD among observational studies (RR: 0.66 [0.45-0.97]). There were no statistically significant differences for the other outcomes between the two treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a number of studies reporting outcomes on the comparison between P-EPD and DF for CAS. P-EDP can reduce distal embolization phenomena resulting into ischemic lesions when compared to DF based on the results from real-world studies. P-EPD was not superior however, in regards to periprocedural stroke, TIA and death. Further studies are anticipated to provide a clear answer to this debate.

摘要

目的

近端栓子保护装置(P-EPD)和远端滤网(DF)用于预防颈动脉支架置入术(CAS)期间的远端脑栓塞。我们比较了它们在预防术中及围手术期不良事件方面的相对有效性,这些不良事件包括缺血性病变(同侧和对侧)、中风、短暂性脑缺血发作(TIA)和死亡。我们还比较了两种神经保护策略联合使用与单一策略在缺血性病变和中风方面的效果。

材料与方法

本研究按照PRISMA和MOOSE指南进行,通过检索PubMed、Scopus和Cochrane Central确定符合条件的研究。采用随机效应模型进行荟萃分析。I²统计量用于评估异质性。

结果

纳入了29项涉及16307例患者的研究。在观察性研究中,使用P-EPD可显著减少缺血性病变(RR:0.66[0.45-0.97])。两个治疗组在其他结局方面无统计学显著差异。

结论

有多项研究报告了P-EPD和DF用于CAS比较的结果。根据真实世界研究结果,与DF相比,P-EDP可减少导致缺血性病变的远端栓塞现象。然而,在围手术期中风、TIA和死亡方面,P-EPD并不优于DF。预计进一步的研究将为这场争论提供明确答案。

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