Suppr超能文献

编辑精选 - 腔内修复术后 II 型内漏治疗结果的系统评价和荟萃分析。

Editor's Choice - Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Outcome of Treatment for Type II Endoleak Following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair.

机构信息

Department of Vascular Surgery, Erasmus MC University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Department of Vascular Surgery, Erasmus MC University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Hospital de Santa Marta, CHLC & NOVA Medical School, Lisbon, Portugal.

出版信息

Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2018 Dec;56(6):794-807. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2018.06.009. Epub 2018 Aug 10.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The efficacy and need for secondary interventions for type II endoleaks following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) remain controversial. This systematic review aimed at investigating the clinical outcomes of different type II endoleak treatments in patients with a persistent type II endoleak after EVAR.

DATA SOURCES

Embase, Medline via Ovid, Web of Science Core Collection, the Cochrane CENTRAL, and Google Scholar.

REVIEW METHODS

This systematic review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA Statement. Outcomes of interest were technical and clinical success, change in sac diameter, complications, need for additional interventions, abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) rupture, and (AAA related) mortality. Meta-analyses were performed with random effects models.

RESULTS

A total of 59 studies were included, with a cumulative cohort of 1073 patients with persistent type II endoleak. Peri-operative complications following treatment of type II endoleaks occurred in 3.8% of patients (95% CI 2.7-5.2%), and AAA related mortality was 1.8% (95% CI 1.1-2.7%). Overall technical success was 87.9% (95% CI 83.1-92.1%), while clinical success was 68.4% (95% CI 61.2-75.1%). Among studies detailing sac dynamics, decrease or stable sac, with or without resolution, was achieved in 78.4% (95% CI 70.2-85.6%). Changes in sac diameter following type II endoleak treatment were documented in 157 patients to at least 24 months. Within this group an actual decrease in sac diameter was reported in only 27 of 40 patients.

CONCLUSION

There is little evidence supporting the efficacy of secondary intervention for type II endoleaks after EVAR. Although generally safe, the lack of evidence supporting the efficacy of type II endoleak treatment leads to difficulty in assessing its merits.

摘要

目的

血管内腹主动脉瘤修复(EVAR)后 II 型内漏的疗效和需要进行二次干预仍存在争议。本系统评价旨在调查 EVAR 后持续存在 II 型内漏的患者不同 II 型内漏治疗的临床结果。

数据来源

Embase、Ovid 中的 Medline、Web of Science 核心合集、Cochrane 中心、Google Scholar。

审查方法

本系统评价按照 PRISMA 声明进行。感兴趣的结果是技术和临床成功率、瘤囊直径变化、并发症、需要额外干预、腹主动脉瘤(AAA)破裂和(AAA 相关)死亡率。采用随机效应模型进行荟萃分析。

结果

共纳入 59 项研究,累计队列 1073 例持续存在 II 型内漏的患者。治疗 II 型内漏后围手术期并发症发生率为 3.8%(95%CI 2.7-5.2%),AAA 相关死亡率为 1.8%(95%CI 1.1-2.7%)。总体技术成功率为 87.9%(95%CI 83.1-92.1%),而临床成功率为 68.4%(95%CI 61.2-75.1%)。在详细描述瘤囊动力学的研究中,78.4%(95%CI 70.2-85.6%)达到瘤囊减小或稳定,有或无缓解。157 例患者至少 24 个月记录了 II 型内漏治疗后瘤囊直径的变化。在这一组中,只有 40 例患者中的 27 例报告了实际的瘤囊直径减小。

结论

EVAR 后 II 型内漏进行二次干预的疗效证据很少。尽管通常是安全的,但缺乏支持 II 型内漏治疗疗效的证据导致难以评估其优点。

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