对伴有或不伴有大脑中动脉高密度征的 M1 闭塞患者进行机械性血栓切除术的疗效:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 1.3 Q4 NEUROIMAGING
Neuroradiology Journal Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2023-12-26 DOI:10.1177/19714009231224446
Atakan Orscelik, Yigit Can Senol, Cem Bilgin, Hassan Kobeissi, Sherief Ghozy, Basel Musmar, Gokce Belge Bilgin, Sara Zandpazandi, Madona Pakkam, Santhosh Arul, Waleed Brinjikji, David F Kallmes
{"title":"对伴有或不伴有大脑中动脉高密度征的 M1 闭塞患者进行机械性血栓切除术的疗效:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Atakan Orscelik, Yigit Can Senol, Cem Bilgin, Hassan Kobeissi, Sherief Ghozy, Basel Musmar, Gokce Belge Bilgin, Sara Zandpazandi, Madona Pakkam, Santhosh Arul, Waleed Brinjikji, David F Kallmes","doi":"10.1177/19714009231224446","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The comparison of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) outcomes between patients with the hyperdense middle cerebral artery sign (HMCAS) and non-HMCAS is important to evaluate the impact of this radiological finding on treatment efficacy. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the association between HMCAS and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing thrombectomy, comparing the outcomes over non-HMCAS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Ovid Embase, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library to identify studies on MT outcomes for M1 occlusions of HMCAS over non-HMCAS. Inclusion criteria encompassed modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score, mortality, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), and successful recanalization. Using R software version 4.1.2, we calculated pooled odds ratios (ORs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The meta-analysis was performed for 5 studies with 724 patients. There was no association found between presence of HMCAS and achieving mRS 0-2 (OR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.29-1.47; <i>p</i> = .544). Mortality analysis also showed no significant association with presence of HMCAS (OR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.37-1.65; <i>p</i> = .520). No significant difference in sICH risk (OR = 1.54, 95% CI: 0.24-9.66; <i>p</i> = .646) was found between groups. Recanalization analysis showed a non-significant positive association (OR = 1.23, 95% CI: 0.67-2.28; <i>p</i> = .501). Heterogeneity was observed in all analyses.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings showed that there is no statistically significant difference in mRS scores, mortality, sICH, and recanalization success rates between the HMCAS and non-HMCAS groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":47358,"journal":{"name":"Neuroradiology Journal","volume":" ","pages":"454-461"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11366193/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Outcomes of mechanical thrombectomy in M1 occlusion patients with or without hyperdense middle cerebral artery sign: A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Atakan Orscelik, Yigit Can Senol, Cem Bilgin, Hassan Kobeissi, Sherief Ghozy, Basel Musmar, Gokce Belge Bilgin, Sara Zandpazandi, Madona Pakkam, Santhosh Arul, Waleed Brinjikji, David F Kallmes\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/19714009231224446\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The comparison of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) outcomes between patients with the hyperdense middle cerebral artery sign (HMCAS) and non-HMCAS is important to evaluate the impact of this radiological finding on treatment efficacy. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the association between HMCAS and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing thrombectomy, comparing the outcomes over non-HMCAS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Ovid Embase, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library to identify studies on MT outcomes for M1 occlusions of HMCAS over non-HMCAS. Inclusion criteria encompassed modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score, mortality, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), and successful recanalization. Using R software version 4.1.2, we calculated pooled odds ratios (ORs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The meta-analysis was performed for 5 studies with 724 patients. There was no association found between presence of HMCAS and achieving mRS 0-2 (OR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.29-1.47; <i>p</i> = .544). Mortality analysis also showed no significant association with presence of HMCAS (OR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.37-1.65; <i>p</i> = .520). No significant difference in sICH risk (OR = 1.54, 95% CI: 0.24-9.66; <i>p</i> = .646) was found between groups. Recanalization analysis showed a non-significant positive association (OR = 1.23, 95% CI: 0.67-2.28; <i>p</i> = .501). Heterogeneity was observed in all analyses.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings showed that there is no statistically significant difference in mRS scores, mortality, sICH, and recanalization success rates between the HMCAS and non-HMCAS groups.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47358,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neuroradiology Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"454-461\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11366193/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neuroradiology Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/19714009231224446\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/12/26 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROIMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuroradiology Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19714009231224446","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROIMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:比较大脑中动脉高密度征(HMCAS)和非 HMCAS 患者的机械血栓切除术(MT)疗效,对于评估这一放射学发现对疗效的影响非常重要。这项荟萃分析旨在评估HMCAS与接受血栓切除术患者的临床疗效之间的关系,并比较与非HMCAS患者的疗效:在 PubMed、Ovid Embase、Google Scholar 和 Cochrane Library 中进行了系统性文献检索,以确定 HMCAS 与非 HMCAS 相比对 M1 闭塞患者 MT 治疗效果的研究。纳入标准包括改良Rankin量表(mRS)评分、死亡率、症状性颅内出血(sICH)和成功再通。我们使用 4.1.2 版 R 软件计算了汇总的几率比(OR)及其相应的 95% 置信区间(CI):荟萃分析对 5 项研究的 724 名患者进行了分析。发现HMCAS的存在与mRS 0-2之间没有关联(OR = 0.65,95% CI:0.29-1.47;p = .544)。死亡率分析也显示,HMCAS 的存在与死亡率无明显关系(OR = 0.78,95% CI:0.37-1.65;P = 0.520)。不同组间的 sICH 风险无明显差异(OR = 1.54,95% CI:0.24-9.66;P = .646)。再狭窄分析显示出非显著的正相关性(OR = 1.23,95% CI:0.67-2.28;P = .501)。所有分析均存在异质性:我们的研究结果表明,HMCAS 组和非 HMCAS 组在 mRS 评分、死亡率、sICH 和再通成功率方面没有统计学意义上的显著差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Outcomes of mechanical thrombectomy in M1 occlusion patients with or without hyperdense middle cerebral artery sign: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: The comparison of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) outcomes between patients with the hyperdense middle cerebral artery sign (HMCAS) and non-HMCAS is important to evaluate the impact of this radiological finding on treatment efficacy. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the association between HMCAS and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing thrombectomy, comparing the outcomes over non-HMCAS.

Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Ovid Embase, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library to identify studies on MT outcomes for M1 occlusions of HMCAS over non-HMCAS. Inclusion criteria encompassed modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score, mortality, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), and successful recanalization. Using R software version 4.1.2, we calculated pooled odds ratios (ORs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Results: The meta-analysis was performed for 5 studies with 724 patients. There was no association found between presence of HMCAS and achieving mRS 0-2 (OR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.29-1.47; p = .544). Mortality analysis also showed no significant association with presence of HMCAS (OR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.37-1.65; p = .520). No significant difference in sICH risk (OR = 1.54, 95% CI: 0.24-9.66; p = .646) was found between groups. Recanalization analysis showed a non-significant positive association (OR = 1.23, 95% CI: 0.67-2.28; p = .501). Heterogeneity was observed in all analyses.

Conclusion: Our findings showed that there is no statistically significant difference in mRS scores, mortality, sICH, and recanalization success rates between the HMCAS and non-HMCAS groups.

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
Neuroradiology Journal
Neuroradiology Journal NEUROIMAGING-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
101
期刊介绍: NRJ - The Neuroradiology Journal (formerly Rivista di Neuroradiologia) is the official journal of the Italian Association of Neuroradiology and of the several Scientific Societies from all over the world. Founded in 1988 as Rivista di Neuroradiologia, of June 2006 evolved in NRJ - The Neuroradiology Journal. It is published bimonthly.
×
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