Suppr超能文献

经桡动脉入路神经介入治疗:文献系统评价。

Transradial approach for neurointerventions: a systematic review of the literature.

机构信息

Neurological Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA

Neurological Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

出版信息

J Neurointerv Surg. 2020 Sep;12(9):886-892. doi: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2019-015764. Epub 2020 Mar 9.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Despite the recent increase in the number of publications on diagnostic cerebral angiograms using transradial access (TRA), there have been relatively few regarding TRA for neurointerventional cases. Questions of feasibility and safety may still exist among physicians considering TRA for neurointerventional procedures.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed following PRISMA guidelines. Three online databases (MedLine via PubMed, Scopus and Embase) were searched for articles published between January 2000 and December 2019. Search terms included "Transradial access", "Radial Access", "Radial artery" AND "Neurointerventions". The reference lists of selected articles and pertinent available non-systematic analysis were reviewed for other potential citations. Primary outcomes measured were access site complications and crossover rates.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies (n=1342 patients) were included in this review. Two of the studies were prospective while the remaining 19 were retrospective. Six studies (n=616 patients) included TRA carotid stenting only. The rest of the studies included treatment for cerebral aneurysms (n=423), mechanical thrombectomy (n=127), tumor embolization (n=22), and other indications (n=154) such as angioplasty and stenting for vertebrobasilar stenosis, balloon test occlusion, embolization of dural arteriovenous fistula and arteriovenous malformation, chemotherapeutic drug delivery, intra-arterial thrombolysis, and arterial access during a venous stenting procedure. Two (0.15%) major complications and 37 (2.75%) minor complications were reported. Sixty-four (4.77%) patients crossed over to transfemoral access for completion of the procedure. Seven (0.52%) patients crossed over due to access failure and 57 (4.24%) patients crossed over to TFA due to inability to cannulate the target vessel.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review demonstrates that TRA has a relatively low rate of access site complications and crossovers. With increasing familiarity, development of TRA-specific neuroendovascular devices, and the continued reports of its success in the literature, TRA is expected to become more widely used by neurointerventionalists.

摘要

背景

尽管经桡动脉入路(TRA)用于诊断性脑血管造影的出版物数量最近有所增加,但针对神经介入病例的 TRA 出版物相对较少。对于考虑将 TRA 用于神经介入手术的医生来说,可行性和安全性问题可能仍然存在。

方法

按照 PRISMA 指南进行系统文献回顾。在三个在线数据库(MedLine 通过 PubMed、Scopus 和 Embase)中搜索 2000 年 1 月至 2019 年 12 月期间发表的文章。检索词包括“Transradial access”、“Radial Access”、“Radial artery”和“Neurointerventions”。选择文章的参考文献列表和相关的非系统分析进行了审查,以寻找其他潜在的引用。主要测量的结果是入路部位并发症和交叉率。

结果

本综述共纳入 21 项研究(n=1342 例患者)。其中 2 项为前瞻性研究,其余 19 项为回顾性研究。6 项研究(n=616 例)仅包括 TRA 颈动脉支架置入术。其余研究包括脑动脉瘤治疗(n=423)、机械血栓切除术(n=127)、肿瘤栓塞(n=22)和其他适应证(n=154),如椎基底动脉狭窄的血管成形术和支架置入、球囊试验闭塞、硬脑膜动静脉瘘和动静脉畸形栓塞、化疗药物输送、动脉内溶栓以及静脉支架置入术中的动脉入路。报告了 2 例(0.15%)严重并发症和 37 例(2.75%)轻微并发症。64 例(4.77%)患者因完成手术而转为经股动脉入路。7 例(0.52%)患者因入路失败而转为 TFA,57 例(4.24%)患者因无法穿刺目标血管而转为 TFA。

结论

本系统评价表明,TRA 的入路部位并发症和交叉率相对较低。随着 TRA 的应用越来越熟悉,TRA 特定的神经介入器械的发展,以及文献中不断报道其成功经验,预计 TRA 将被更多的神经介入医生所采用。

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