Comparative Analysis of Stent-Assisted Versus Non-Stent-Assisted Coiling in the Management of Ruptured Intracranial Aneurysms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 3.8 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Yu-Hu Ma, Yong-Lin He, Xiao-Yue Zhang, Rui Shang, Hai-Tao Hu, Ting Wang, Sen Lin, Ya-Wen Pan, Chang-Wei Zhang
{"title":"Comparative Analysis of Stent-Assisted Versus Non-Stent-Assisted Coiling in the Management of Ruptured Intracranial Aneurysms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Yu-Hu Ma, Yong-Lin He, Xiao-Yue Zhang, Rui Shang, Hai-Tao Hu, Ting Wang, Sen Lin, Ya-Wen Pan, Chang-Wei Zhang","doi":"10.1007/s12975-024-01314-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To systematically evaluate the safety and efficacy of SAC compared to non-SAC in the treatment of RIA, integrating evidence from high-quality studies to guide clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A meta-analysis was conducted to compare SAC with coiling alone and BAC in the treatment of RIA. Primary outcomes were immediate and follow-up aneurysm occlusion rates, along with perioperative hemorrhagic and ischemic complication rates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of thirteen retrospective cohort studies were included, comprising 3,086 patients, with 1,078 in the SAC group and 2,008 in the non-SAC group. The immediate complete occlusion rates were similar between the SAC and non-SAC groups (59.1% vs. 61.4%; RR = 1.00; 95% CI [0.94, 1.07]; p = 0.92). However, the SAC group demonstrated a significantly higher long-term complete occlusion rate (61.3% vs. 40.6%; RR = 1.44; 95% CI [1.22, 1.69]; p < 0.001). The incidence of ischemic complications was greater in the SAC group (12.2% vs. 10.0%; RR = 1.68; 95% CI [1.37, 2.07]; p < 0.001), as was the incidence of hemorrhagic complications (7.3% vs. 5.1%; RR = 1.55; 95% CI [1.15, 2.08]; p = 0.004). Perioperative mortality was also elevated in the SAC group (6.7% vs. 6.8%; RR = 1.37; 95% CI [1.00, 1.88]; p = 0.048), with a non-significant trend towards higher long-term mortality (9.8% vs. 9.2%; RR = 1.35; 95% CI [0.98, 1.87]; p = 0.068). Functional outcomes at discharge (76.0% vs. 71.0%; RR = 0.97; 95% CI [0.92, 1.02]; p = 0.237), six months (57.8% vs. 60.8%; RR = 0.93; 95% CI [0.81, 1.07]; p = 0.296), and at the last follow-up (RR = 1.01; 95% CI [0.97, 1.06]; p = 0.592) were comparable between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>SAC significantly improves long-term occlusion rates for RIA compared to non-SAC, despite a higher incidence of complications. Careful patient selection and optimization of antiplatelet therapy may enhance the safety and efficacy of SAC for RIA treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":23237,"journal":{"name":"Translational Stroke Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Translational Stroke Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12975-024-01314-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To systematically evaluate the safety and efficacy of SAC compared to non-SAC in the treatment of RIA, integrating evidence from high-quality studies to guide clinical practice.

Methods: A meta-analysis was conducted to compare SAC with coiling alone and BAC in the treatment of RIA. Primary outcomes were immediate and follow-up aneurysm occlusion rates, along with perioperative hemorrhagic and ischemic complication rates.

Results: A total of thirteen retrospective cohort studies were included, comprising 3,086 patients, with 1,078 in the SAC group and 2,008 in the non-SAC group. The immediate complete occlusion rates were similar between the SAC and non-SAC groups (59.1% vs. 61.4%; RR = 1.00; 95% CI [0.94, 1.07]; p = 0.92). However, the SAC group demonstrated a significantly higher long-term complete occlusion rate (61.3% vs. 40.6%; RR = 1.44; 95% CI [1.22, 1.69]; p < 0.001). The incidence of ischemic complications was greater in the SAC group (12.2% vs. 10.0%; RR = 1.68; 95% CI [1.37, 2.07]; p < 0.001), as was the incidence of hemorrhagic complications (7.3% vs. 5.1%; RR = 1.55; 95% CI [1.15, 2.08]; p = 0.004). Perioperative mortality was also elevated in the SAC group (6.7% vs. 6.8%; RR = 1.37; 95% CI [1.00, 1.88]; p = 0.048), with a non-significant trend towards higher long-term mortality (9.8% vs. 9.2%; RR = 1.35; 95% CI [0.98, 1.87]; p = 0.068). Functional outcomes at discharge (76.0% vs. 71.0%; RR = 0.97; 95% CI [0.92, 1.02]; p = 0.237), six months (57.8% vs. 60.8%; RR = 0.93; 95% CI [0.81, 1.07]; p = 0.296), and at the last follow-up (RR = 1.01; 95% CI [0.97, 1.06]; p = 0.592) were comparable between the two groups.

Conclusions: SAC significantly improves long-term occlusion rates for RIA compared to non-SAC, despite a higher incidence of complications. Careful patient selection and optimization of antiplatelet therapy may enhance the safety and efficacy of SAC for RIA treatment.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Translational Stroke Research
Translational Stroke Research CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-NEUROSCIENCES
CiteScore
13.80
自引率
4.30%
发文量
130
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Translational Stroke Research covers basic, translational, and clinical studies. The Journal emphasizes novel approaches to help both to understand clinical phenomenon through basic science tools, and to translate basic science discoveries into the development of new strategies for the prevention, assessment, treatment, and enhancement of central nervous system repair after stroke and other forms of neurotrauma. Translational Stroke Research focuses on translational research and is relevant to both basic scientists and physicians, including but not restricted to neuroscientists, vascular biologists, neurologists, neuroimagers, and neurosurgeons.
×
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