Brenner Leonardo O, Prestes Milena Zadra, Soares Cid, Romeiro Pedro, Gomez Victor A, Rabelo Nicollas Nunes, Welling Leonardo C, Koester Stefan W, Pinheiro Agostinho C, Batista Sávio, Bertani Raphael, Figueiredo Eberval Gadelha, Cavalcanti Daniel Dutra
Department of Medicine, State University of Ponta Grossa, Ponta Grossa, Brazil.
Department of Medicine, University Center UNiAtenas, Passos, Brazil.
Interv Neuroradiol. 2024 Dec 13:15910199241301820. doi: 10.1177/15910199241301820.
Dissecting intracranial aneurysms (DIAs) have been treated through endovascular reconstructive manners, such as flow diverters (FDs) and stent-assisted coiling (SAC). Notably, no robust evidence has compared both approaches. Hence, the authors conducted a meta-analysis to compare their outcomes.
PubMed, Embase and Web of Science were searched for studies employing SAC and FD treatment for DIAs. The following outcomes were considered for extraction: procedure-related mortality, total mortality, postoperative and follow-up complete aneurysm occlusion, complications, good clinical outcomes, recurrence, and retreatment. Odds ratio (OR) with random effects was employed for statistical comparison.
The meta-analysis included 10 studies. A total of 195 and 222 patients were included in the FD and the SAC group, respectively. Stent-assisted coiling had higher postoperative complete aneurysm occlusion rates (OR 0.03; 95% CI 0.01-0.08). Flow diverter retreatment rate was lower, but without statistical significance (OR 0.35; 95% CI 0.11-1.10). No significant differences were found in follow-up complete aneurysm occlusion (OR 1.18; 95% CI 0.35-3.99); total mortality (OR 0.44; 95% CI 0.09-2.08); intraoperative complications (OR 0.30; 95% CI 0.06-1.45); postoperative complication (OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.35-1.70); good clinical outcomes (OR 0.97; 95% CI 0.43-2.20); and recurrence (OR 0.38; 95% CI 0.13-1.10) between the two groups.
Stent-assisted coiling shows higher postoperative complete aneurysmal occlusion rates, but both techniques achieve similar rates in angiographic follow-up. Flow diverter has lower, but not statistically significant, retreatment rates than SAC. Both techniques have similar complication rates. Future randomized, multicenter, and prospective studies with larger sample sizes are needed for more conclusive findings.
夹层颅内动脉瘤(DIAs)已通过血管内重建方式进行治疗,如血流导向装置(FDs)和支架辅助弹簧圈栓塞术(SAC)。值得注意的是,尚无有力证据对这两种方法进行比较。因此,作者进行了一项荟萃分析以比较它们的疗效。
检索PubMed、Embase和Web of Science数据库,查找采用SAC和FD治疗DIAs的研究。提取以下疗效指标:手术相关死亡率、总死亡率、术后及随访时动脉瘤完全闭塞情况、并发症、良好临床结局、复发率和再次治疗情况。采用随机效应的比值比(OR)进行统计学比较。
该荟萃分析纳入了10项研究。FD组和SAC组分别纳入了195例和222例患者。支架辅助弹簧圈栓塞术的术后动脉瘤完全闭塞率更高(OR 0.03;95%CI 0.01 - 0.08)。血流导向装置的再次治疗率较低,但无统计学意义(OR 0.35;95%CI 0.11 - 1.10)。两组在随访时动脉瘤完全闭塞情况(OR 1.18;95%CI 0.35 - 3.99)、总死亡率(OR 0.44;95%CI 0.09 - 2.08)、术中并发症(OR 0.30;95%CI 0.06 - 1.45)、术后并发症(OR 0.77;95%CI 0.35 - 1.70)、良好临床结局(OR 0.97;95%CI 0.43 - 2.20)和复发率(OR 0.38;95%CI 0.13 - 1.10)方面均未发现显著差异。
支架辅助弹簧圈栓塞术显示出更高的术后动脉瘤完全闭塞率,但两种技术在血管造影随访中的闭塞率相似。血流导向装置的再次治疗率低于SAC,但无统计学意义。两种技术的并发症发生率相似。未来需要开展更大样本量的随机、多中心前瞻性研究以获得更确凿的结果。