Min Xiaoli, Du Jianhua, Bai Xuesong, Wei Tao, Dmytriw Adam A, Patel Aman B, Zhang Xiao, Xu Xin, Feng Yao, Wang Tao, Wang Xue, Yang Kun, Hu Weiwu, Yi Tingyu, Chen Wenhuo, Jiao Liqun
Department of Cerebrovascular Diseases, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Department of Neurosurgery, Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Front Neurol. 2022 Jan 12;12:757665. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2021.757665. eCollection 2021.
Acute ischemic stroke (AIS) caused by tandem intracranial and extracranial occlusions is not rare. However, optimal strategy between antegrade (extracranial first) or retrograde (intracranial first) approaches still remains elusive. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to compare the two approaches to provide updated clinical evidence of strategy selection. PubMed, Ovid, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched for literature comparing antegrade and retrograde approaches for patients with AIS with concomitant tandem occlusions. Outcomes including successful reperfusion [Throbolysis in Cerebral Infarction (TICI) 2b-3] and 90-day favorable outcome [modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0-2], any intracerebral hemorrhage, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage, procedural complications, and mortality were evaluated. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and illustrated in the Funnel plot. Heterogeneity was assessed by statistic. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were also performed. A total of 11 studies accounting 1,517 patients were included. 831 (55%) patients were treated with an antegrade approach and 686 (45%) patients were treated with the retrograde approach. A higher successful reperfusion rate was achieved in retrograde group than that of antegrade group [83.8 vs. 78.0%; odds ratio (OR): 0.63, 95% CI: 0.40-0.99, = 0.04]. 90-day favorable outcome (mRS 0-2 at 90 days) also showed significantly higher in retrograde group compared with antegrade group (47.3 vs. 40.2%; OR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.58-0.89, = 0.002). The incidence of any intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, 90-day mortality, and other complications did not differ between two groups. In AIS with tandem occlusions, the retrograde approach might achieve a higher successful reperfusion rate and better functional outcome with a comparable safety profile when compared with an antegrade approach. Further prospective controlled studies with more meticulous design and a higher level of evidence are needed to confirm these results. "PROSPERO" database (CRD 42020199093), https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/.
由颅内和颅外串联闭塞引起的急性缺血性卒中(AIS)并不罕见。然而,顺行(先颅外)或逆行(先颅内)方法之间的最佳策略仍不明确。本系统评价和荟萃分析旨在比较这两种方法,以提供策略选择的最新临床证据。检索了PubMed、Ovid、Web of Science和Cochrane图书馆,以查找比较AIS合并串联闭塞患者顺行和逆行方法的文献。评估的结果包括成功再灌注[脑梗死溶栓(TICI)2b-3级]和90天良好预后[改良Rankin量表(mRS)0-2级]、任何颅内出血、症状性颅内出血、手术并发症和死亡率。使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表评估偏倚风险,并在漏斗图中显示。通过统计量评估异质性。还进行了亚组分析和敏感性分析。共纳入11项研究,涉及1517例患者。831例(55%)患者采用顺行方法治疗,686例(45%)患者采用逆行方法治疗。逆行组的成功再灌注率高于顺行组[83.8%对78.0%;优势比(OR):0.63,95%置信区间:0.40-0.99,P = 0.04]。逆行组的90天良好预后(90天时mRS 0-2级)也显著高于顺行组(47.3%对40.2%;OR:0.72,95%置信区间:0.58-0.89,P = 0.002)。两组之间任何颅内出血(ICH)、症状性颅内出血、90天死亡率和其他并发症的发生率无差异。在AIS合并串联闭塞中,与顺行方法相比,逆行方法可能实现更高的成功再灌注率和更好的功能预后,且安全性相当。需要进一步进行设计更精细、证据水平更高的前瞻性对照研究来证实这些结果。“PROSPERO”数据库(CRD 42020199093),https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ 。