跳至主導覽 跳至搜尋 跳過主要內容

Combined balloon guide catheter, aspiration catheter, and stent retriever technique versus balloon guide catheter and stent retriever alone technique: A systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Yao Neng Teo
  • , Ching Hui Sia
  • , Benjamin Y.Q. Tan*
  • , Jing Mingxue
  • , Bernard Chan
  • , Vijay Kumar Sharma
  • , Andrew Makmur
  • , Anil Gopinathan
  • , Cunli Yang
  • , Stanley Loh
  • , Sheldon Ng
  • , Shao Jin Ong
  • , Hock Luen Teoh
  • , Rahul Rathakrishnan
  • , Tommy Andersson
  • , Fabian Arnberg
  • , Vamsi Krishna Gontu
  • , Tsong Hai Lee
  • , Volker Maus
  • , Lukas Meyer
  • Pervinder Bhogal, Oliver Spooner, Tony Y.W. Li, Rodney Y.H. Soh, Leonard L.L. Yeo
*此作品的通信作者
  • National University of Singapore
  • MOH Holdings Pte Ltd.
  • National University Hospital
  • AZ Groeninge
  • Karolinska Institutet
  • Chang Gung Memorial Hospital
  • Ruhr University Bochum
  • University of Hamburg
  • Barts Health NHS Trust

研究成果: 期刊稿件文章同行評審

11 引文 斯高帕斯(Scopus)

摘要

Background: The use of a combination of balloon guide catheter (BGC), aspiration catheter, and stent retriever in acute ischemic stroke thrombectomy has not been shown to be better than a stent retriever and BGC alone, but this may be due to a lack of power in these studies. We therefore performed a meta-analysis on this subject. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed on PubMed, Scopus, Embase/Ovid, and the Cochrane Library from inception to October 20, 2021. Our primary outcomes were the rate of successful final reperfusion (Treatment in Cerebral Ischemia (TICI) 2c-3) and first pass effect (FPE, defined as TICI 2c-3 in a single pass). Secondary outcomes were 3 month functional independence (modified Rankin Scale score of 0-2), mortality, procedural complications, embolic complications, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (SICH). A meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5,4, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 test. Results: Of 1629 studies identified, five articles with 2091 patients were included. For the primary outcomes, FPE (44.9% vs 45.4%, OR 1.04 (95% CI 0.90 to 1.22), I2=57%) or final successful reperfusion (64.5% vs 68.6%, OR 0.98 (95% CI 0.81% to 1.20%), I2=85%) was similar between the combination technique and stent retriever only groups. However, the combination technique had significantly less rescue treatment (18.8% vs 26.9%; OR 0.70 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.91), I2=0%). This did not translate into significant differences in secondary outcomes in functional outcomes, mortality, emboli, complications, or SICH. Conclusion: There was no significant difference in successful reperfusion and FPE between the combined techniques and the stent retriever and BGC alone groups. Neither was there any difference in functional outcomes, complications, or mortality.

原文英語
文章編號018406
期刊Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery
DOIs
出版狀態待刊 - 2022
對外發佈

文獻附註

Publisher Copyright:
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

UN SDG

此研究成果有助於以下永續發展目標

  1. SDG3 健康與福祉
    SDG3 健康與福祉

指紋

深入研究「Combined balloon guide catheter, aspiration catheter, and stent retriever technique versus balloon guide catheter and stent retriever alone technique: A systematic review and meta-analysis」主題。共同形成了獨特的指紋。

引用此