Different types of percutaneous endovascular interventions for acute ischemic stroke.
Journal
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews
ISSN: 1469-493X
Titre abrégé: Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100909747
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
30 05 2023
30 05 2023
Historique:
pmc-release:
30
05
2024
medline:
1
6
2023
pubmed:
30
5
2023
entrez:
30
5
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Acute ischemic stroke (AIS) is the abrupt reduction of blood flow to a certain area of the brain which causes neurologic dysfunction. Different types of percutaneous arterial endovascular interventions have been developed, but as yet there is no consensus on the optimal therapy for people with AIS. To compare the safety and efficacy of different types of percutaneous arterial endovascular interventions for treating people with AIS. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Issue 4 of 12, 2022), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 13 May 2022), Embase (1947 to 15 May 2022), Science Citation Index Web of Science (1900 to 15 May 2022), Scopus (1960 to 15 May 2022), and China Biological Medicine Database (CBM; 1978 to 16 May 2022). We also searched the ClinicalTrials.gov trials register and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to 16 May 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing one percutaneous arterial endovascular intervention with another in treating adult patients who have a clinical diagnosis of AIS due to large vessel occlusion and confirmed by imaging evidence, including thrombo-aspiration, stent-retrieval thrombectomy, aspiration-retriever combined technique, and thrombus mechanical fragmentation. Two review authors independently performed the literature searches, identified eligible trials, and extracted data. A third review author participated in discussions to reach consensus decisions when any disputes occurred. We assessed risk of bias and applied the GRADE approach to evaluate the quality of the evidence. The primary outcome was rate of modified Rankin Scale (mRS) of 0 to 2 at three months. Secondary outcomes included the rate of modified Thrombolysis In Cerebral Infarction (mTICI) of 2b to 3 postprocedure, all-cause mortality within three months, rate of intracranial hemorrhage on imaging at 24 hours, rate of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage at 24 hours, and rate of procedure-related adverse events within three months. Four RCTs were eligible. The current meta-analysis included two trials with 651 participants comparing thrombo-aspiration with stent-retrieval thrombectomy. We judged the quality of evidence to be high in both trials according to Cochrane's risk of bias tool RoB 2. There were no significant differences between thrombo-aspiration and stent-retrieval thrombectomy in rate of mRS of 0 to 2 at three months (risk ratio [RR] 0.97, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82 to 1.13; P = 0.68; 633 participants; 2 RCTs); rate of mTICI of 2b to 3 postprocedure (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.07; P = 0.77; 650 participants; 2 RCTs); all-cause mortality within three months (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.37; P = 0.95; 633 participants; 2 RCTs); rate of intracranial hemorrhage on imaging at 24 hours (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.24; P = 0.73; 645 participants; 2 RCTs); rate of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage at 24 hours (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.68; P = 0.75; 645 participants; 2 RCTs); and rate of procedure-related adverse events within three months (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.41; P = 0.90; 651 participants; 2 RCTs). Another two included studies reported no differences for the comparisons of combined therapy versus stent-retrieval thrombectomy or thrombo-aspiration. One RCT is ongoing. This review did not establish any difference in safety and effectiveness between the thrombo-aspiration approach and stent-retrieval thrombectomy for treating people with AIS. Furthermore, the combined group did not show any obvious advantage over either intervention applied alone.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Acute ischemic stroke (AIS) is the abrupt reduction of blood flow to a certain area of the brain which causes neurologic dysfunction. Different types of percutaneous arterial endovascular interventions have been developed, but as yet there is no consensus on the optimal therapy for people with AIS.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the safety and efficacy of different types of percutaneous arterial endovascular interventions for treating people with AIS.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Issue 4 of 12, 2022), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 13 May 2022), Embase (1947 to 15 May 2022), Science Citation Index Web of Science (1900 to 15 May 2022), Scopus (1960 to 15 May 2022), and China Biological Medicine Database (CBM; 1978 to 16 May 2022). We also searched the ClinicalTrials.gov trials register and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to 16 May 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing one percutaneous arterial endovascular intervention with another in treating adult patients who have a clinical diagnosis of AIS due to large vessel occlusion and confirmed by imaging evidence, including thrombo-aspiration, stent-retrieval thrombectomy, aspiration-retriever combined technique, and thrombus mechanical fragmentation.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently performed the literature searches, identified eligible trials, and extracted data. A third review author participated in discussions to reach consensus decisions when any disputes occurred. We assessed risk of bias and applied the GRADE approach to evaluate the quality of the evidence. The primary outcome was rate of modified Rankin Scale (mRS) of 0 to 2 at three months. Secondary outcomes included the rate of modified Thrombolysis In Cerebral Infarction (mTICI) of 2b to 3 postprocedure, all-cause mortality within three months, rate of intracranial hemorrhage on imaging at 24 hours, rate of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage at 24 hours, and rate of procedure-related adverse events within three months.
MAIN RESULTS
Four RCTs were eligible. The current meta-analysis included two trials with 651 participants comparing thrombo-aspiration with stent-retrieval thrombectomy. We judged the quality of evidence to be high in both trials according to Cochrane's risk of bias tool RoB 2. There were no significant differences between thrombo-aspiration and stent-retrieval thrombectomy in rate of mRS of 0 to 2 at three months (risk ratio [RR] 0.97, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82 to 1.13; P = 0.68; 633 participants; 2 RCTs); rate of mTICI of 2b to 3 postprocedure (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.07; P = 0.77; 650 participants; 2 RCTs); all-cause mortality within three months (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.37; P = 0.95; 633 participants; 2 RCTs); rate of intracranial hemorrhage on imaging at 24 hours (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.24; P = 0.73; 645 participants; 2 RCTs); rate of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage at 24 hours (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.68; P = 0.75; 645 participants; 2 RCTs); and rate of procedure-related adverse events within three months (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.41; P = 0.90; 651 participants; 2 RCTs). Another two included studies reported no differences for the comparisons of combined therapy versus stent-retrieval thrombectomy or thrombo-aspiration. One RCT is ongoing.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review did not establish any difference in safety and effectiveness between the thrombo-aspiration approach and stent-retrieval thrombectomy for treating people with AIS. Furthermore, the combined group did not show any obvious advantage over either intervention applied alone.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37249304
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014676.pub2
pmc: PMC10228464
doi:
Types de publication
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
CD014676Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Références
N Engl J Med. 1996 May 23;334(21):1405-6
pubmed: 8614438
BMJ. 2009 Jul 21;339:b2700
pubmed: 19622552
Stroke. 1999 Jul;30(7):1486-9
pubmed: 10390327
N Engl J Med. 2015 Mar 12;372(11):1019-30
pubmed: 25671798
J Neurol. 2021 Dec;268(12):4594-4606
pubmed: 33123777
J Neuroradiol. 2015 Feb;42(1):12-20
pubmed: 25660218
Stat Methods Med Res. 2001 Aug;10(4):277-303
pubmed: 11491414
JAMA. 2021 Sep 28;326(12):1158-1169
pubmed: 34581737
Presse Med. 2016 Dec;45(12 Pt 2):e391-e398
pubmed: 27816343
Lancet Neurol. 2020 Feb;19(2):115-122
pubmed: 31831388
N Engl J Med. 2013 Jul 4;369(1):11-9
pubmed: 23803136
Open Access Emerg Med. 2017 Sep 19;9:89-96
pubmed: 29033616
Neuroepidemiology. 2018;50(1-2):63-73
pubmed: 29421788
Stroke. 2019 Dec;50(12):3408-3415
pubmed: 31619150
Neurosurgery. 2002 Nov;51(5):1319-27; discussion 1327-9
pubmed: 12383381
J Stroke. 2017 May;19(2):121-130
pubmed: 28592779
Stroke. 2018 Sep;49(9):2088-2095
pubmed: 30354993
N Engl J Med. 2015 Jun 11;372(24):2285-95
pubmed: 25882376
Therapie. 1999 Jul Aug;54(4):405-11
pubmed: 10667106
JAMA. 1995 Oct 4;274(13):1017-25
pubmed: 7563451
J Neurointerv Surg. 2019 Jun;11(6):535-538
pubmed: 31152058
Int J Stroke. 2018 Dec;13(9):885-892
pubmed: 30035698
Cerebrovasc Dis. 2018;46(1-2):16-23
pubmed: 30007980
Lancet Neurol. 2016 Sep;15(10):1028-34
pubmed: 27450474
Circulation. 2012 Jan 3;125(1):e2-e220
pubmed: 22179539
N Engl J Med. 2020 May 21;382(21):1981-1993
pubmed: 32374959
Lancet. 2014 Nov 29;384(9958):1929-35
pubmed: 25106063
Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2019 Oct 10;5(1):70
pubmed: 31601801
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2018 Nov;39(11):2070-2076
pubmed: 30337435
J Neurointerv Surg. 2015 Sep;7(9):666-70
pubmed: 25028502
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Oct 26;10:CD009292
pubmed: 30365156
Eur J Neurol. 2018 Feb;25(2):284-292
pubmed: 29053904
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2002 Feb;23(2):277-81
pubmed: 11847054
N Engl J Med. 2020 Jul 16;383(3):207-217
pubmed: 32668111
Clin Neuroradiol. 2018 Sep;28(3):327-338
pubmed: 28194477
Lancet. 2008 May 10;371(9624):1612-23
pubmed: 18468545
N Engl J Med. 2015 Jan 1;372(1):11-20
pubmed: 25517348
N Engl J Med. 2018 Dec 20;379(25):2429-2437
pubmed: 30575491
N Engl J Med. 2015 Mar 12;372(11):1009-18
pubmed: 25671797
Clin Pharmacokinet. 2002;41(15):1229-45
pubmed: 12452736
Lancet. 1997 Jun 7;349(9066):1641-9
pubmed: 9186381
Lancet Neurol. 2016 Aug;15(9):925-933
pubmed: 27289487
Lancet. 1997 May 31;349(9065):1569-81
pubmed: 9174558
JAMA Neurol. 2019 Jul 1;76(7):850-854
pubmed: 30958530
Interv Neuroradiol. 2019 Jun;25(3):244-253
pubmed: 30864466
Neurosurgery. 2020 Apr 1;86(4):464-477
pubmed: 31313819
Circulation. 2011 Mar 1;123(8):933-44
pubmed: 21262990
N Engl J Med. 2013 Mar 7;368(10):914-23
pubmed: 23394476
J Neurointerv Surg. 2016 Nov;8(11):1123-1128
pubmed: 26667250
World Neurosurg. 2019 Mar;123:e604-e608
pubmed: 30529522
Circulation. 2019 Mar 5;139(10):e56-e528
pubmed: 30700139
J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2020 Dec;29(12):105374
pubmed: 33254366
BMJ. 2016 Apr 18;353:i1754
pubmed: 27091337
JAMA. 2017 Aug 1;318(5):443-452
pubmed: 28763550
Eur J Health Econ. 2019 Feb;20(1):107-134
pubmed: 29909569
J Neurointerv Surg. 2022 Nov;14(11):1130-1134
pubmed: 34857667
Stroke. 2014 Apr;45(4):1215-21
pubmed: 24503668
N Engl J Med. 2013 Mar 7;368(10):904-13
pubmed: 23387822
J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2019 May;28(5):1329-1337
pubmed: 30772159
Expert Rev Neurother. 2011 Feb;11(2):265-73
pubmed: 21306213
J Neurointerv Surg. 2017 Dec;9(12):1154-1159
pubmed: 27986848
BMJ. 2004 Jun 19;328(7454):1490
pubmed: 15205295
J Neurosurg. 2020 Jun 05;134(5):1569-1577
pubmed: 32502991
Front Neurol. 2020 Dec 08;11:582994
pubmed: 33363505
Stroke. 2018 Mar;49(3):e46-e110
pubmed: 29367334
Lancet Neurol. 2018 Jan;17(1):47-53
pubmed: 29263006
Stroke. 2002 Feb;33(2):493-5
pubmed: 11823658
Lancet. 2019 Mar 9;393(10175):998-1008
pubmed: 30860055
Neurology. 1998 Mar;50(3):599-603
pubmed: 9521242
JAMA Neurol. 2018 Mar 1;75(3):304-311
pubmed: 29296999
Lancet Neurol. 2019 May;18(5):439-458
pubmed: 30871944
Eur Neurol. 2014;72(5-6):309-16
pubmed: 25323674
N Engl J Med. 2013 Mar 7;368(10):893-903
pubmed: 23390923
J Neurosurg. 2018 Dec 1;129(6):1482-1491
pubmed: 29327997
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 May 30;5:CD014676
pubmed: 37249304
J Neurointerv Surg. 2018 Jun;10(6):525-529
pubmed: 28963362