针对有局限性半影的大面积脑梗死的卒中血栓切除术:随机试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。

Huanwen Chen, Seemant Chaturvedi, Dheeraj Gandhi, Marco Colasurdo
{"title":"针对有局限性半影的大面积脑梗死的卒中血栓切除术:随机试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Huanwen Chen, Seemant Chaturvedi, Dheeraj Gandhi, Marco Colasurdo","doi":"10.3174/ajnr.A8553","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Middle meningeal artery embolization (MMAE) has emerged as a novel treatment for non-acute subdural hematoma (SDH), particularly for reducing the risk of SDH recurrence. Recently, five randomized controlled trials (RCT) of MMAE as an adjunct to conventional management (surgical or observant) have concluded their investigation and reported their outcomes.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To synthesize trial results to provide more definitive guidance on the role of MMAE in the management of non-acute SDH.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>MEDLINE database from inception up to November 23, 2024. English-language clinical articles reporting large randomized controlled trials (<i>n</i> = 100 or more) investigating the efficacy and safety of MMAE for non-acute subdural hematoma patients were identified.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>Five trials were identified - EMBOLISE, STEM, MAGIC-MT, EMPROTECT, and MEMBRANE.</p><p><strong>Data analysis: </strong>The primary efficacy endpoint was SDH treatment failure (broadly defined as SDH recurrence or requirement of surgical rescue) within 3 to 6 months. Safety endpoints include death and stroke.</p><p><strong>Data synthesis: </strong>There was significant heterogeneity in terms of patient populations as well as reported outcomes. Overall, MMAE was associated with significantly lower odds of SDH treatment failure (OR 0.51 [95% CI 0.39 to 0.67], <i>P</i> < 0.001), with minimal inter-study heterogeneity. Compared to conventional management, MMAE was not significantly associated with different odds of death (OR 1.03 [95% CI 0.36 to 2.99], <i>P</i> = 0.95) or stroke (OR 1.10 [95% CI 0.36 to 3.39], <i>P</i> = 0.86).</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Our meta-analysis is limited by selection bias and high heterogeneity in study design and reported outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study provides high-level evidence that, for patients with non-acute SDH, MMAE is safe and effective an adjunct to conventional management for preventing treatment failure.</p>","PeriodicalId":93863,"journal":{"name":"AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Stroke Thrombectomy for Large Infarcts with Limited Penumbra: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.\",\"authors\":\"Huanwen Chen, Seemant Chaturvedi, Dheeraj Gandhi, Marco Colasurdo\",\"doi\":\"10.3174/ajnr.A8553\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Middle meningeal artery embolization (MMAE) has emerged as a novel treatment for non-acute subdural hematoma (SDH), particularly for reducing the risk of SDH recurrence. Recently, five randomized controlled trials (RCT) of MMAE as an adjunct to conventional management (surgical or observant) have concluded their investigation and reported their outcomes.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To synthesize trial results to provide more definitive guidance on the role of MMAE in the management of non-acute SDH.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>MEDLINE database from inception up to November 23, 2024. English-language clinical articles reporting large randomized controlled trials (<i>n</i> = 100 or more) investigating the efficacy and safety of MMAE for non-acute subdural hematoma patients were identified.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>Five trials were identified - EMBOLISE, STEM, MAGIC-MT, EMPROTECT, and MEMBRANE.</p><p><strong>Data analysis: </strong>The primary efficacy endpoint was SDH treatment failure (broadly defined as SDH recurrence or requirement of surgical rescue) within 3 to 6 months. Safety endpoints include death and stroke.</p><p><strong>Data synthesis: </strong>There was significant heterogeneity in terms of patient populations as well as reported outcomes. Overall, MMAE was associated with significantly lower odds of SDH treatment failure (OR 0.51 [95% CI 0.39 to 0.67], <i>P</i> < 0.001), with minimal inter-study heterogeneity. Compared to conventional management, MMAE was not significantly associated with different odds of death (OR 1.03 [95% CI 0.36 to 2.99], <i>P</i> = 0.95) or stroke (OR 1.10 [95% CI 0.36 to 3.39], <i>P</i> = 0.86).</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Our meta-analysis is limited by selection bias and high heterogeneity in study design and reported outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study provides high-level evidence that, for patients with non-acute SDH, MMAE is safe and effective an adjunct to conventional management for preventing treatment failure.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93863,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A8553\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A8553","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:最近的随机试验表明,对于大面积梗死的卒中患者,血管内血栓切除术(EVT)优于药物治疗(MM)。然而,是否应使用灌注指标或如何使用灌注指标来指导选择最佳患者进行治疗,目前仍是一个未知数:这是一项随机对照试验的荟萃分析,根据灌注错配情况对EVT治疗大面积脑梗死的效果进行分层。不匹配率为 1.2-1.8 或半影体积为 10-15cc (中度不匹配)或不匹配率为 1.2-1.8 的患者:纳入了 SELECT2 和 ANGEL-ASPECT 两项试验;确定了 140 例中度错配患者(75 例 EVT 和 65 例 MM)和 60 例低度错配患者(23 例 EVT 和 37 例 MM)。EVT与中度错配患者更高的mRS 0至3几率明显相关(汇总OR 2.77 [95%CI 1.11-6.89],p=0.028;图1),但与低度错配患者无关(汇总OR 1.47 [95%CI 0.444.94],p=0.54;图1)。同样,就 90 天不良预后(mRS 5 或 6)而言,中度不匹配患者的 EVT 与较低的几率显著相关(OR 0.49 [95%CI 0.24 至 0.99],p=0.046;图 2),而低度不匹配队列的 EVT 与较低的几率无关(OR 0.66 [95%CI 0.22 至 1.96],p=0.45;图 2)。各研究估计值之间没有明显的研究间异质性:结论:对于大面积梗死患者,EVT似乎对灌注失配比和体积至少为1.2和10cc的患者有益,但对灌注失配比为1.2和10cc的患者无益:缩写:EVT = 血管内血栓切除术;MM = 医疗管理;OR = 机率比;CI = 置信区间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Stroke Thrombectomy for Large Infarcts with Limited Penumbra: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.

Background: Middle meningeal artery embolization (MMAE) has emerged as a novel treatment for non-acute subdural hematoma (SDH), particularly for reducing the risk of SDH recurrence. Recently, five randomized controlled trials (RCT) of MMAE as an adjunct to conventional management (surgical or observant) have concluded their investigation and reported their outcomes.

Purpose: To synthesize trial results to provide more definitive guidance on the role of MMAE in the management of non-acute SDH.

Data sources: MEDLINE database from inception up to November 23, 2024. English-language clinical articles reporting large randomized controlled trials (n = 100 or more) investigating the efficacy and safety of MMAE for non-acute subdural hematoma patients were identified.

Study selection: Five trials were identified - EMBOLISE, STEM, MAGIC-MT, EMPROTECT, and MEMBRANE.

Data analysis: The primary efficacy endpoint was SDH treatment failure (broadly defined as SDH recurrence or requirement of surgical rescue) within 3 to 6 months. Safety endpoints include death and stroke.

Data synthesis: There was significant heterogeneity in terms of patient populations as well as reported outcomes. Overall, MMAE was associated with significantly lower odds of SDH treatment failure (OR 0.51 [95% CI 0.39 to 0.67], P < 0.001), with minimal inter-study heterogeneity. Compared to conventional management, MMAE was not significantly associated with different odds of death (OR 1.03 [95% CI 0.36 to 2.99], P = 0.95) or stroke (OR 1.10 [95% CI 0.36 to 3.39], P = 0.86).

Limitations: Our meta-analysis is limited by selection bias and high heterogeneity in study design and reported outcomes.

Conclusions: This study provides high-level evidence that, for patients with non-acute SDH, MMAE is safe and effective an adjunct to conventional management for preventing treatment failure.

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
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