茎突长度与颈动脉夹层的关系:meta分析

Loay H Abdelnour , Mohammed Kurdy , Abubakr Idris
{"title":"茎突长度与颈动脉夹层的关系:meta分析","authors":"Loay H Abdelnour ,&nbsp;Mohammed Kurdy ,&nbsp;Abubakr Idris","doi":"10.1016/j.hsr.2023.100134","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the association of elongated styloid process (Eagle syndrome) and cervical artery dissection (CeAD), particularly carotid. Medline, PubMed Central, CINAHL and ProQuest were searched for case-control studies investigating the association of styloid process length (SPL) and CeAD, particularly carotid. SPL was treated as a continuous variable and mean difference was calculated from means and standard deviations with 95 % confidence interval (CI). SPL &gt;30 mm was compared between cases and controls as a dichotomous variable and odds ratio (OR) was calculated with 95 % CI. Heterogeneity was quantified with χ2-based Cochran's Q-test and I<sup>2</sup>-statistic. Four studies were included comparing 185 dissection cases with 278 controls. Heterogeneity was 50 %, but was reduced to 0 % with sensitivity analysis. Styloid process was significantly longer in dissection group with a mean difference of 2.50 [-0.35, 5.35], <em>P</em> = 0.09. Elimination of one study with high risk of bias resulted in a mean difference of 3.61 [1.47, 5.75], <em>P</em> = 0.0009, and a heterogeneity of 0 %. Two studies showed SPL &gt;30 mm to be more significant in dissection group (OR = 1.53 [0.84,2.80], <em>P</em> = 0.17). With sensitivity analysis the pooled OR was 2.09 [1.04, 4.19], <em>P</em> = 0.04. Three studies showed that mean SPL was significantly longer ipsilateral compared to contralateral side of dissection (mean difference 2.63 [0.46, 4.79], <em>P</em> = 0.02. This meta-analysis suggests that CeAD is significantly associated with styloid process mean length and SPL &gt;30 mm. Case-control studies with bigger numbers are required to substantiate this association.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":73214,"journal":{"name":"Health sciences review (Oxford, England)","volume":"9 ","pages":"Article 100134"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772632023000600/pdfft?md5=a5552dd47a0e300b4fce7d21bdd8cddd&pid=1-s2.0-S2772632023000600-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Association of styloid process length with cervical carotid artery dissection: Meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Loay H Abdelnour ,&nbsp;Mohammed Kurdy ,&nbsp;Abubakr Idris\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.hsr.2023.100134\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the association of elongated styloid process (Eagle syndrome) and cervical artery dissection (CeAD), particularly carotid. Medline, PubMed Central, CINAHL and ProQuest were searched for case-control studies investigating the association of styloid process length (SPL) and CeAD, particularly carotid. SPL was treated as a continuous variable and mean difference was calculated from means and standard deviations with 95 % confidence interval (CI). SPL &gt;30 mm was compared between cases and controls as a dichotomous variable and odds ratio (OR) was calculated with 95 % CI. Heterogeneity was quantified with χ2-based Cochran's Q-test and I<sup>2</sup>-statistic. Four studies were included comparing 185 dissection cases with 278 controls. Heterogeneity was 50 %, but was reduced to 0 % with sensitivity analysis. Styloid process was significantly longer in dissection group with a mean difference of 2.50 [-0.35, 5.35], <em>P</em> = 0.09. Elimination of one study with high risk of bias resulted in a mean difference of 3.61 [1.47, 5.75], <em>P</em> = 0.0009, and a heterogeneity of 0 %. Two studies showed SPL &gt;30 mm to be more significant in dissection group (OR = 1.53 [0.84,2.80], <em>P</em> = 0.17). With sensitivity analysis the pooled OR was 2.09 [1.04, 4.19], <em>P</em> = 0.04. Three studies showed that mean SPL was significantly longer ipsilateral compared to contralateral side of dissection (mean difference 2.63 [0.46, 4.79], <em>P</em> = 0.02. This meta-analysis suggests that CeAD is significantly associated with styloid process mean length and SPL &gt;30 mm. Case-control studies with bigger numbers are required to substantiate this association.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73214,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health sciences review (Oxford, England)\",\"volume\":\"9 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100134\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772632023000600/pdfft?md5=a5552dd47a0e300b4fce7d21bdd8cddd&pid=1-s2.0-S2772632023000600-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health sciences review (Oxford, England)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772632023000600\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health sciences review (Oxford, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772632023000600","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

本荟萃分析旨在研究茎突延长(Eagle综合征)与颈动脉夹层(CeAD),特别是颈动脉夹层的关系。我们检索了Medline、PubMed Central、CINAHL和ProQuest的病例对照研究,以调查茎突突长度(SPL)与头颈部病变(尤其是颈动脉)之间的关系。SPL被视为连续变量,并以95%置信区间(CI)的均值和标准差计算平均差。SPL >30 mm作为二分变量在病例和对照组之间进行比较,并以95% CI计算优势比(OR)。采用基于χ2的Cochran’s q检验和i2统计量对异质性进行量化。纳入4项研究,比较185例夹层病例和278例对照。异质性为50%,但通过敏感性分析降低到0%。夹层组茎突明显延长,平均差异为2.50 [-0.35,5.35],P = 0.09。排除一项高偏倚风险的研究,平均差异为3.61 [1.47,5.75],P = 0.0009,异质性为0%。两项研究显示夹层组SPL >30 mm更为显著(OR = 1.53 [0.84,2.80], P = 0.17)。经敏感性分析,合并OR为2.09 [1.04,4.19],P = 0.04。3项研究显示,同侧夹层的平均SPL明显长于对侧夹层(平均差异为2.63 [0.46,4.79],P = 0.02)。该荟萃分析表明,CeAD与茎突平均长度和SPL (30mm)显著相关。需要更大数量的病例对照研究来证实这种关联。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Association of styloid process length with cervical carotid artery dissection: Meta-analysis

This meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the association of elongated styloid process (Eagle syndrome) and cervical artery dissection (CeAD), particularly carotid. Medline, PubMed Central, CINAHL and ProQuest were searched for case-control studies investigating the association of styloid process length (SPL) and CeAD, particularly carotid. SPL was treated as a continuous variable and mean difference was calculated from means and standard deviations with 95 % confidence interval (CI). SPL >30 mm was compared between cases and controls as a dichotomous variable and odds ratio (OR) was calculated with 95 % CI. Heterogeneity was quantified with χ2-based Cochran's Q-test and I2-statistic. Four studies were included comparing 185 dissection cases with 278 controls. Heterogeneity was 50 %, but was reduced to 0 % with sensitivity analysis. Styloid process was significantly longer in dissection group with a mean difference of 2.50 [-0.35, 5.35], P = 0.09. Elimination of one study with high risk of bias resulted in a mean difference of 3.61 [1.47, 5.75], P = 0.0009, and a heterogeneity of 0 %. Two studies showed SPL >30 mm to be more significant in dissection group (OR = 1.53 [0.84,2.80], P = 0.17). With sensitivity analysis the pooled OR was 2.09 [1.04, 4.19], P = 0.04. Three studies showed that mean SPL was significantly longer ipsilateral compared to contralateral side of dissection (mean difference 2.63 [0.46, 4.79], P = 0.02. This meta-analysis suggests that CeAD is significantly associated with styloid process mean length and SPL >30 mm. Case-control studies with bigger numbers are required to substantiate this association.

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
Health sciences review (Oxford, England)
Health sciences review (Oxford, England) Medicine and Dentistry (General)
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
75 days
×
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