Is size of infarct or clinical picture that should delay urgent carotid endarterectomy? A meta-analysis.

R. Pini, G. Faggioli, A. Vacirca, Mortalla Dieng, S. Fronterré, E. Gallitto, C. Mascoli, A. Stella, M. Gargiulo
{"title":"Is size of infarct or clinical picture that should delay urgent carotid endarterectomy? A meta-analysis.","authors":"R. Pini, G. Faggioli, A. Vacirca, Mortalla Dieng, S. Fronterré, E. Gallitto, C. Mascoli, A. Stella, M. Gargiulo","doi":"10.23736/S0021-9509.19.11120-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION\nThe best timing for carotid endarterectomy in patients with stroke is still matter of debate, particularly in case of significant cerebral ischemic lesion or neurological deterioration. The present review and meta-analysis aims to report the best evidence in the outcome of patients submitted to urgent (<48h) or standard elapsing time (<2-week) CEA for stroke and to evaluate the impact of cerebral ischemic lesion size and clinical manifestation in the postoperative outcome.\n\n\nEVIDENCE ACQUISITION\nA systematic review and meta-analysis was performed by searching through Scopus and PubMed all papers reporting CEA outcome (stroke and stroke/death) in patients who suffered a stable stroke, treated within 48h and 2 weeks from symptoms. A subgroup analysis of studies reporting the presence and size of cerebral lesion and clinical manifestation was planned. The pooled 30-day stroke and stroke/death risk (effect size) was expressed by crude percentage and 95% confidence interval (CI), by random effect model.\n\n\nEVIDENCE SYNTHESIS\nSixteen studies were included in the meta-analysis, 7 reporting the CEA outcome performed <48h from stroke and 13 reporting the outcome of CEA performed <2-week. The effect size of stroke and stroke/death of CEA performed <48h from symptoms was 7.4% (95% CI: 3.7-11.2) and 7.9% (95% CI: 4.0-11.8) respectively, and for CEA <2-week was 4.5% (95% CI: 2.8- 6.3) and 5.4% (95% CI: 3.4-7.4) respectively. Due to the extremely high heterogeneity of the studies data, the effect size was not calculated, however the authors agreed in considering the severity of stroke and the volume of the cerebral ischemic lesion a risk factor for postoperative complication. Two studies evaluated the effect of the cerebral ischemic lesion distribution; the presence of a border- zone infarct was associated with a significant increase in the risk of post-operative stroke/death rate compared with territorial cerebral ischemic lesion (OR: 6.0; 95%CI 1.1-32.0).\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nCEA for patients with a recent stroke is associated with 5.4% and 7.9% of stroke/death. A large volume of the cerebral ischemic lesion and a deteriorated neurological status are associated with a higher perioperative risk; urgent carotid revascularization seems to further increase this risk.","PeriodicalId":101333,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of cardiovascular surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of cardiovascular surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S0021-9509.19.11120-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

INTRODUCTION The best timing for carotid endarterectomy in patients with stroke is still matter of debate, particularly in case of significant cerebral ischemic lesion or neurological deterioration. The present review and meta-analysis aims to report the best evidence in the outcome of patients submitted to urgent (<48h) or standard elapsing time (<2-week) CEA for stroke and to evaluate the impact of cerebral ischemic lesion size and clinical manifestation in the postoperative outcome. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed by searching through Scopus and PubMed all papers reporting CEA outcome (stroke and stroke/death) in patients who suffered a stable stroke, treated within 48h and 2 weeks from symptoms. A subgroup analysis of studies reporting the presence and size of cerebral lesion and clinical manifestation was planned. The pooled 30-day stroke and stroke/death risk (effect size) was expressed by crude percentage and 95% confidence interval (CI), by random effect model. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Sixteen studies were included in the meta-analysis, 7 reporting the CEA outcome performed <48h from stroke and 13 reporting the outcome of CEA performed <2-week. The effect size of stroke and stroke/death of CEA performed <48h from symptoms was 7.4% (95% CI: 3.7-11.2) and 7.9% (95% CI: 4.0-11.8) respectively, and for CEA <2-week was 4.5% (95% CI: 2.8- 6.3) and 5.4% (95% CI: 3.4-7.4) respectively. Due to the extremely high heterogeneity of the studies data, the effect size was not calculated, however the authors agreed in considering the severity of stroke and the volume of the cerebral ischemic lesion a risk factor for postoperative complication. Two studies evaluated the effect of the cerebral ischemic lesion distribution; the presence of a border- zone infarct was associated with a significant increase in the risk of post-operative stroke/death rate compared with territorial cerebral ischemic lesion (OR: 6.0; 95%CI 1.1-32.0). CONCLUSIONS CEA for patients with a recent stroke is associated with 5.4% and 7.9% of stroke/death. A large volume of the cerebral ischemic lesion and a deteriorated neurological status are associated with a higher perioperative risk; urgent carotid revascularization seems to further increase this risk.
梗塞的大小或临床表现是否应该延迟紧急颈动脉内膜切除术?一个荟萃分析。
脑卒中患者颈动脉内膜切除术的最佳时机仍然存在争议,特别是在脑缺血病变或神经系统恶化的情况下。本综述和荟萃分析旨在报告卒中紧急(<48小时)或标准时间(<2周)CEA患者预后的最佳证据,并评估脑缺血病变大小和临床表现对术后预后的影响。通过检索Scopus和PubMed中所有报道稳定性卒中患者,在症状出现后48小时和2周内接受治疗的CEA结果(卒中和卒中/死亡)的论文,进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析。计划对报告脑损伤的存在、大小和临床表现的研究进行亚组分析。合并的30天卒中和卒中/死亡风险(效应大小)用粗百分比和95%置信区间(CI)表示,采用随机效应模型。meta分析纳入了16项研究,其中7项报告了卒中后48小时内CEA的结果,13项报告了卒中后2周内CEA的结果。CEA <48小时的卒中和卒中/死亡效应量分别为7.4% (95% CI: 3.7-11.2)和7.9% (95% CI: 4.0-11.8), CEA <2周的卒中和卒中/死亡效应量分别为4.5% (95% CI: 2.8- 6.3)和5.4% (95% CI: 3.4-7.4)。由于研究数据具有极高的异质性,因此没有计算效应大小,但作者同意将脑卒中的严重程度和脑缺血病变的体积作为术后并发症的危险因素。两项研究评估了脑缺血病变分布的影响;与区域性脑缺血损伤相比,边界区梗死的存在与术后卒中/死亡率的风险显著增加相关(OR: 6.0;95%可信区间1.1 - -32.0)。结论近期卒中患者的scea与卒中/死亡的5.4%和7.9%相关。大面积脑缺血病变和神经功能恶化与围手术期风险较高相关;紧急颈动脉重建术似乎进一步增加了这种风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信