Students' Scientific Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Department of Pediatric Neurological Surgery, Children's Medical Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Neurosurg Rev. 2024 Oct 29;47(1):825. doi: 10.1007/s10143-024-03016-5.
The Woven EndoBridge (WEB), functioning as an intrasaccular disruption device, offers a novel option for complex aneurysms, particularly bifurcation aneurysms. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, our goal is to compare the safety and efficacy of WEB devices with stent-assisted coiling (SAC) for intracranial bifurcation aneurysms.
We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, and Embase, and Web of Science databases in September 2024 following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We aimed to compare aneurysmal occlusion, procedural time, the retreatment, and complication rates as secondary objectives. The comparison between the two techniques was performed using a weighted random-effects model, and the quality of the studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for cohort studies.
The authors analyzed five studies encompassing 298 and 203 patients in SAC and WEB groups, respectively. Complete (OR, 0.97; 95%CI: 0.63-1.49, I = 0%) and adequate (OR: 0.88; 95%CI: 0.51-1.5, I = 0%) occlusion didn't differ between two groups. The overall procedural time mean difference was 38.2 min, significantly higher in the SAC group (95%CI, 26.9-49.6, I = 53.4%). Retreatment rates did not significantly differ between the two groups (OR: 1.34; 95%CI: 0.37-4.85, I = 61.7%). The SAC group experienced more complications during and after the operation (OR, 2.82; 95%CI: 1.07-7.44, I = 0%). The pooled follow-up duration was 22.1 and 13.5 months for SAC and WEB groups respectively.
The WEB demonstrates comparable efficacy in occluding bifurcation aneurysms compared to SAC, with the added benefits of reduced procedural time and lower complication rates.
编织型 EndoBridge(WEB)作为一种腔内破坏装置,为复杂动脉瘤,特别是分叉部动脉瘤提供了一种新的选择。本系统评价和荟萃分析旨在比较 WEB 装置与支架辅助弹簧圈栓塞术(SAC)治疗颅内分叉部动脉瘤的安全性和有效性。
我们按照系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南,于 2024 年 9 月在 PubMed、Scopus、Embase 和 Web of Science 数据库中进行了系统搜索。我们旨在比较动脉瘤闭塞、手术时间、再治疗和并发症发生率作为次要目标。使用加权随机效应模型对两种技术进行比较,并使用 Newcastle-Ottawa 量表(NOS)对队列研究进行研究质量评估。
作者分析了 5 项研究,SAC 组和 WEB 组分别纳入了 298 例和 203 例患者。完全闭塞(OR,0.97;95%CI:0.63-1.49,I=0%)和充分闭塞(OR:0.88;95%CI:0.51-1.5,I=0%)在两组之间无差异。总体手术时间平均差异为 38.2 分钟,SAC 组显著较高(95%CI,26.9-49.6,I=53.4%)。两组再治疗率无显著差异(OR:1.34;95%CI:0.37-4.85,I=61.7%)。SAC 组术中及术后并发症发生率较高(OR,2.82;95%CI:1.07-7.44,I=0%)。SAC 组和 WEB 组的平均随访时间分别为 22.1 个月和 13.5 个月。
WEB 在闭塞分叉部动脉瘤方面与 SAC 具有相当的疗效,同时具有手术时间更短和并发症发生率更低的优点。