内窥镜手术与开颅术治疗自发性脑内血肿:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。

Q2 Medicine
Xiaolin Du, Xiaoning Lin, Cheng Wang, Kun Zhou, Yigong Wei, Xinhua Tian
{"title":"内窥镜手术与开颅术治疗自发性脑内血肿:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Xiaolin Du,&nbsp;Xiaoning Lin,&nbsp;Cheng Wang,&nbsp;Kun Zhou,&nbsp;Yigong Wei,&nbsp;Xinhua Tian","doi":"10.1186/s41016-022-00304-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (SICH) has high morbidity and mortality, with no clear standard of treatment available. Compared with the craniotomy approach, neuroendoscopy is a relatively minimally invasive treatment method, and may be an efficient alternative. Therefore, this meta-analysis aimed to assess the clinical efficacy of neuroendoscopy and craniotomy in SICH patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The electronic databases Web of Science, PubMed, EmBase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched. According to the PRISMA template, we finally selected and analyzed 14 eligible studies that evaluated neuroendoscopy versus craniotomy. Primary outcomes included operation time, intraoperative blood loss volume, evacuation rate, residual hematoma, complications, hospital stay duration, clinical outcomes, and other parameters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 10 retrospective studies (non-RCTs) involving 1652 patients were included in the final analysis. In the neuroendoscopy (NE) group, operation time (p < 0.00001), intraoperative blood loss volume (p < 0.0001), hematoma evacuation rate (p = 0.0002), complications (p < 0.00001), hospitalization days (p = 0.004), and mortality (p < 0.0001) were significantly different from those of the craniotomy (C) group, with a higher rate of good recovery compared with the craniotomy group (P < 0.00001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings suggest that patients with SICH and physicians may benefit more from neuroendoscopic surgery than craniotomy.</p>","PeriodicalId":36700,"journal":{"name":"Chinese Neurosurgical Journal","volume":"8 1","pages":"36"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9701065/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Endoscopic surgery versus craniotomy in the treatment of spontaneous intracerebral hematoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Xiaolin Du,&nbsp;Xiaoning Lin,&nbsp;Cheng Wang,&nbsp;Kun Zhou,&nbsp;Yigong Wei,&nbsp;Xinhua Tian\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s41016-022-00304-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (SICH) has high morbidity and mortality, with no clear standard of treatment available. Compared with the craniotomy approach, neuroendoscopy is a relatively minimally invasive treatment method, and may be an efficient alternative. Therefore, this meta-analysis aimed to assess the clinical efficacy of neuroendoscopy and craniotomy in SICH patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The electronic databases Web of Science, PubMed, EmBase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched. According to the PRISMA template, we finally selected and analyzed 14 eligible studies that evaluated neuroendoscopy versus craniotomy. Primary outcomes included operation time, intraoperative blood loss volume, evacuation rate, residual hematoma, complications, hospital stay duration, clinical outcomes, and other parameters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 10 retrospective studies (non-RCTs) involving 1652 patients were included in the final analysis. In the neuroendoscopy (NE) group, operation time (p < 0.00001), intraoperative blood loss volume (p < 0.0001), hematoma evacuation rate (p = 0.0002), complications (p < 0.00001), hospitalization days (p = 0.004), and mortality (p < 0.0001) were significantly different from those of the craniotomy (C) group, with a higher rate of good recovery compared with the craniotomy group (P < 0.00001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings suggest that patients with SICH and physicians may benefit more from neuroendoscopic surgery than craniotomy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36700,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chinese Neurosurgical Journal\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"36\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9701065/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chinese Neurosurgical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41016-022-00304-1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chinese Neurosurgical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41016-022-00304-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:自发性脑出血(siich)具有高发病率和死亡率,目前尚无明确的治疗标准。与开颅手术相比,神经内窥镜是一种相对微创的治疗方法,可能是一种有效的替代方法。因此,本荟萃分析旨在评估神经内窥镜和开颅术在脑出血患者中的临床疗效。方法:系统检索Web of Science、PubMed、EmBase、MEDLINE、Cochrane Library等电子数据库。根据PRISMA模板,我们最终选择并分析了14项评估神经内窥镜与开颅手术的合格研究。主要结局包括手术时间、术中出血量、疏散率、残留血肿、并发症、住院时间、临床结局等参数。结果:最终分析共纳入4项随机对照试验(rct)和10项回顾性研究(非rct),共1652例患者。神经内镜(NE)组手术时间(p < 0.00001)、术中出血量(p < 0.0001)、血肿排出率(p = 0.0002)、并发症(p < 0.00001)、住院天数(p = 0.004)、病死率(p < 0.0001)均显著高于开颅(C)组,良好恢复率高于开颅组(p < 0.00001)。结论:这些发现表明,SICH患者和医生可能从神经内窥镜手术中比开颅手术获益更多。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Endoscopic surgery versus craniotomy in the treatment of spontaneous intracerebral hematoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Endoscopic surgery versus craniotomy in the treatment of spontaneous intracerebral hematoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Endoscopic surgery versus craniotomy in the treatment of spontaneous intracerebral hematoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Endoscopic surgery versus craniotomy in the treatment of spontaneous intracerebral hematoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (SICH) has high morbidity and mortality, with no clear standard of treatment available. Compared with the craniotomy approach, neuroendoscopy is a relatively minimally invasive treatment method, and may be an efficient alternative. Therefore, this meta-analysis aimed to assess the clinical efficacy of neuroendoscopy and craniotomy in SICH patients.

Methods: The electronic databases Web of Science, PubMed, EmBase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched. According to the PRISMA template, we finally selected and analyzed 14 eligible studies that evaluated neuroendoscopy versus craniotomy. Primary outcomes included operation time, intraoperative blood loss volume, evacuation rate, residual hematoma, complications, hospital stay duration, clinical outcomes, and other parameters.

Results: A total of 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 10 retrospective studies (non-RCTs) involving 1652 patients were included in the final analysis. In the neuroendoscopy (NE) group, operation time (p < 0.00001), intraoperative blood loss volume (p < 0.0001), hematoma evacuation rate (p = 0.0002), complications (p < 0.00001), hospitalization days (p = 0.004), and mortality (p < 0.0001) were significantly different from those of the craniotomy (C) group, with a higher rate of good recovery compared with the craniotomy group (P < 0.00001).

Conclusions: These findings suggest that patients with SICH and physicians may benefit more from neuroendoscopic surgery than craniotomy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
224
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
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