Hammed Ali, Al-Qiami Almonzer, Alomari Omar, Otmani Zina, Hammed Salah, Sarhan Khalid, Derhab Mohamed, Hamouda Abdelrahman, Rosenbauer Josef, Kostev Karel, Richter Gregor, Braun Veit, Tanislav Christian
Department of Geriatrics and Neurology, Diakonie Hospital Jung Stilling, Siegen, Germany.
Neurological Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Kassala University, Kassala, Sudan.
Neurol Sci. 2025 Jun;46(6):2499-2522. doi: 10.1007/s10072-024-07963-1. Epub 2025 Jan 30.
Surgical clipping and endovascular coiling are both effective in preventing aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage, but the choice between these interventions remains controversial, leading to treatment disparities across medical centers.
A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted, including relevant two-arm clinical trials up to September 2023, sourced from Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Our primary outcomes were complete occlusion rates during mid-term and long-term follow-ups. Standard mean differences and risk ratios were used to analyze variations in outcomes. Python meta-analysis with sensitivity testing and regional subgroup analysis was used to resolve heterogeneity.
The analysis included 139,485 participants. Clipping demonstrated significantly higher complete occlusion rates in midterm follow-up (RR = 0.83, 95% CI [0.75, 0.91], p = 0.0001) but was associated with a higher risk of procedural complications such as bleeding and ischemic stroke. Coiling showed a higher risk of retreatment (RR = 3.46, 95% CI [1.21, 9.86], p = 0.02), yet it had lower procedural complications (RR = 0.54, 95% CI [0.38, 0.78], p < 0.0009), shorter hospital stays (MD 4.36, 95% CI [2.96, 5.77], p = 0.0001), and better post-procedural outcomes as indicated by lower modified Rankin Scale scores (RR = 0.73, 95% CI [0.55, 0.97], p = 0.03). Long-term occlusion rates were comparable between the two methods.
While clipping achieves higher mid-term occlusion rates, coiling is associated with fewer complication rates, shorter hospital stays, and potentially better long-term outcomes. Treatment decisions should be individualized, considering patient-specific characteristics and procedural feasibility.
手术夹闭和血管内栓塞在预防动脉瘤性蛛网膜下腔出血方面均有效,但这两种干预措施之间的选择仍存在争议,导致各医疗中心的治疗差异。
进行了一项系统评价和荟萃分析,纳入截至2023年9月的相关双臂临床试验,数据来源为Scopus、PubMed、科学网和考克兰图书馆。我们的主要结局是中期和长期随访期间的完全闭塞率。采用标准化均数差和风险比来分析结局差异。使用带有敏感性测试和区域亚组分析的Python荟萃分析来解决异质性问题。
分析纳入了139485名参与者。夹闭在中期随访中显示出显著更高的完全闭塞率(RR = 0.83,95% CI [0.75, 0.91],p = 0.0001),但与出血和缺血性卒中等手术并发症的较高风险相关。栓塞显示出再次治疗的较高风险(RR = 3.46,95% CI [1.21, 9.86],p = 0.02),但其手术并发症较低(RR = 0.54,95% CI [0.38, 0.78],p < 0.0009),住院时间较短(MD 4.36,95% CI [2.96, 5.77],p = 0.0001),且改良Rankin量表评分较低表明术后结局较好(RR = 0.73,95% CI [0.55, 0.97],p = 0.03)。两种方法的长期闭塞率相当。
虽然夹闭实现了更高的中期闭塞率,但栓塞的并发症发生率较低、住院时间较短且可能具有更好的长期结局。治疗决策应个体化,考虑患者的具体特征和手术可行性。