• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Flow diverter versus stent-assisted coiling treatment for managing dissecting intracranial aneurysms: A systematic review and meta-analysis.血流导向装置与支架辅助弹簧圈栓塞治疗颅内夹层动脉瘤的系统评价和荟萃分析
Interv Neuroradiol. 2024 Dec 13:15910199241301820. doi: 10.1177/15910199241301820.
2
Treatment of Paraclinoid Aneurysms With Stent-Assisted Coiling Versus Flow Diversion Techniques: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.支架辅助弹簧圈栓塞术与血流导向技术治疗床突旁动脉瘤的系统评价和Meta分析
J Craniofac Surg. 2025;36(5):1502-1508. doi: 10.1097/SCS.0000000000010998. Epub 2024 Dec 27.
3
Flow diverters versus stent-assisted coiling in unruptured intracranial vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms.未破裂颅内椎动脉夹层动脉瘤的血流导向装置与支架辅助弹簧圈栓塞术的比较
J Neurosurg. 2023 Oct 13;140(4):1064-1070. doi: 10.3171/2023.7.JNS23444. Print 2024 Apr 1.
4
Sole Stenting versus Stent-Assisted Coiling for Treating Dissecting Posterior Circulation Aneurysms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.单纯支架置入术与支架辅助弹簧圈栓塞术治疗后循环夹层动脉瘤的系统评价和Meta分析
World Neurosurg. 2024 Dec;192:201-211.e9. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2024.09.020. Epub 2024 Sep 11.
5
Efficacy of Flow Diverter versus Stent-Assisted Coiling for Treating Small- and Medium-Sized Intracranial Wide-Neck Cystic Aneurysms.血流导向装置与支架辅助弹簧圈栓塞治疗中小型颅内宽颈囊性动脉瘤的疗效比较
World Neurosurg. 2025 Jun;198:123990. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2025.123990. Epub 2025 Apr 17.
6
Endovascular Embolization of Intracranial Aneurysms: To Use Stent(s) or Not? Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.颅内动脉瘤的血管内栓塞治疗:是否使用支架?系统评价与荟萃分析。
World Neurosurg. 2016 Sep;93:271-8. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2016.06.014. Epub 2016 Jun 14.
7
Endovascular Treatment of Basilar Apex Aneurysms: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis in the Era of Flow Diversion.血流导向装置时代基底动脉顶端动脉瘤的血管内治疗:一项更新的系统评价和荟萃分析
World Neurosurg. 2024 Oct;190:422-433.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2024.07.142. Epub 2024 Jul 26.
8
Endovascular Treatment of Ruptured Blister-Like Aneurysms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis with Focus on Deconstructive versus Reconstructive and Flow-Diverter Treatments.破裂水泡样动脉瘤的血管内治疗:一项系统评价和荟萃分析,重点关注解构性与重建性及血流导向治疗
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015 Dec;36(12):2331-9. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A4438. Epub 2015 Sep 17.
9
Coiling Variations for Treatment of Ruptured Intracranial Aneurysms: A Meta-Analytical Comparison of Comaneci-, Stent-, and Balloon-Coiling Assistance Techniques.颅内破裂动脉瘤的线圈变异治疗:Comaneci、支架和球囊辅助线圈技术的荟萃分析比较。
World Neurosurg. 2023 Jul;175:e1324-e1340. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2023.05.008. Epub 2023 May 9.
10
Treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms using the novel generation of flow-diverters with surface modification: A systematic review and meta-analysis.新型表面改性血流导向装置治疗破裂颅内动脉瘤的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Interv Neuroradiol. 2024 Jun;30(3):350-360. doi: 10.1177/15910199221117921. Epub 2022 Aug 5.

引用本文的文献

1
Difficulty and prospects of endovascular treatment for spontaneous intracranial artery dissection.自发性颅内动脉夹层血管内治疗的难点与前景
Front Neurol. 2025 Mar 3;16:1560883. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2025.1560883. eCollection 2025.

本文引用的文献

1
Comparative meta-analysis of endovascular strategies for intracranial dissecting aneurysms: Flow diverters versus stents with or without coiling.颅内夹层动脉瘤血管内治疗策略的比较荟萃分析:血流导向装置与带或不带弹簧圈栓塞的支架对比
Interv Neuroradiol. 2024 Jun 14:15910199241262070. doi: 10.1177/15910199241262070.
2
Flow diverters in the treatment of intracranial dissecting aneurysms: a systematic review and meta-analysis of safety and efficacy.血流导向装置治疗颅内夹层动脉瘤:安全性和有效性的系统评价和荟萃分析。
J Neurointerv Surg. 2024 Sep 17;16(10):1005-1012. doi: 10.1136/jnis-2023-021117.
3
Efficacy and predicting factors of multimodal treatment for ruptured intracranial vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms.破裂颅内椎动脉夹层动脉瘤的多模态治疗的疗效及预测因素。
Neurosurg Rev. 2023 Dec 1;46(1):321. doi: 10.1007/s10143-023-02226-7.
4
Flow diverters versus stent-assisted coiling in unruptured intracranial vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms.未破裂颅内椎动脉夹层动脉瘤的血流导向装置与支架辅助弹簧圈栓塞术的比较
J Neurosurg. 2023 Oct 13;140(4):1064-1070. doi: 10.3171/2023.7.JNS23444. Print 2024 Apr 1.
5
Complications of Endovascular and Open Aneurysm Surgery in the Era of Flow Diversion.血流导向装置时代血管内和开放手术治疗动脉瘤的并发症。
Acta Neurochir Suppl. 2023;130:85-94. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-12887-6_11.
6
Low-profile visualized intraluminal support-within-Enterprise overlapping-stent technique versus flow diversion in the treatment of intracranial vertebrobasilar trunk dissecting aneurysms.低轮廓可视化腔内支撑-Enterprise重叠支架技术与血流导向术治疗颅内椎基底动脉主干夹层动脉瘤的对比
Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2023 Jun 1;13(6):3536-3546. doi: 10.21037/qims-22-970. Epub 2023 Apr 14.
7
Flow diverters in the treatment of unruptured vertebral artery dissecting aneurysm: A single-center experience.血流导向装置治疗未破裂椎动脉夹层动脉瘤:单中心经验
Front Neurol. 2023 Feb 22;14:1050619. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2023.1050619. eCollection 2023.
8
Stent-Assisted Coil Embolization Versus Flow-Diverting Stent in Unruptured Vertebral Artery Dissecting Aneurysms: Efficacy and Safety Comparison.支架辅助弹簧圈栓塞与血流导向支架治疗未破裂椎动脉夹层动脉瘤的疗效和安全性比较。
Neurosurgery. 2023 Jul 1;93(1):120-127. doi: 10.1227/neu.0000000000002384. Epub 2023 Feb 9.
9
Periprocedural cerebrovascular complications and 30-day outcomes of endovascular treatment for intracranial vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms.颅内椎动脉夹层动脉瘤血管内治疗的围手术期脑血管并发症及30天预后
J Neurosurg. 2022 Nov 18;138(6):1503-1511. doi: 10.3171/2022.10.JNS221953. Print 2023 Jun 1.
10
Clinical characteristics, endovascular choices, and surgical outcomes of intracranial vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms: a consecutive series of 196 patients.颅内椎动脉夹层动脉瘤的临床特征、血管内治疗选择及手术结果:196例连续病例系列研究
J Neurosurg. 2022 Jun 3;138(1):215-222. doi: 10.3171/2022.4.JNS22609. Print 2023 Jan 1.

血流导向装置与支架辅助弹簧圈栓塞治疗颅内夹层动脉瘤的系统评价和荟萃分析

Flow diverter versus stent-assisted coiling treatment for managing dissecting intracranial aneurysms: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

作者信息

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

机构信息

Department of Medicine, State University of Ponta Grossa, Ponta Grossa, Brazil.

Department of Medicine, University Center UNiAtenas, Passos, Brazil.

出版信息

Interv Neuroradiol. 2024 Dec 13:15910199241301820. doi: 10.1177/15910199241301820.

DOI:10.1177/15910199241301820
PMID:39668743
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11638934/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

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.

METHODS

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.

RESULTS

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.

CONCLUSION

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.

摘要

背景

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。

方法

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。

结果

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。

结论

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。