European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery : the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery · 2018
Editor's Choice - An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Outcomes Following Eversion vs. Conventional Carotid Endarterectomy in Randomised Controlled Trials and Observational Studies.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Paraskevas Kosmas I, Robertson Vaux, Saratzis Athanasios N, Naylor A Ross
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: A 2011 meta-analysis comparing eversion (eCEA) with conventional (cCEA) carotid endarterectomy in 16,251 patients concluded that eCEA was associated with lower rates of peri-operative stroke and late occlusion compared with cCEA. However, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) showed no difference in outcomes. Since then, the literature contains outcome data on 49,500 patients undergoing eCEA or cCEA. An updated meta-analysis was performed to establish whether eCEA confers significant benefit over cCEA.
METHODS: This was a systematic review of PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases for RCTs and observational studies (OSs) comparing eCEA with cCEA. A sensitivity analysis was also performed using data from OSs with a Newcastle-Ottawa score >5.
RESULTS: There were 25 eligible studies (5 RCTs, 20 OSs) involving 49,500 CEAs (16,249 eCEAs; 33,251 cCEAs). RCT data: Compared with cCEA, eCEA did not confer significant reductions in 30 day stroke, death, death/stroke, death/stroke/MI, or neck haematoma. However, eCEA was associated with reduced late restenosis (OR 0.40; p = .001). OS data: eCEA was associated with significant reductions in 30 day death (OR 0.46; p < .0001), stroke (OR 0.58; p < .0001), death/stroke (OR 0.52; p < .0001), death/stroke/MI (OR 0.50; p < .0001), and late restenosis (OR 0.49; p = .032) compared with cCEA. RCT and OS data combined: eCEA was associated with significant reductions in 30 day death (OR 0.55; p < .0001), stroke (OR 0.63; p = .004), death/stroke (OR 0.58; p < .0001), and late restenosis (OR 0.45; p = .004) compared with cCEA. eCEA vs. patched cCEA (RCT and OS data): There were no differences between the two procedures except for neck haematoma, where eCEA was better than patched cCEA.
CONCLUSIONS: Using combined RCT and OS data, eCEA was superior to cCEA regarding peri-operative outcomes (stroke, death, death/stroke) and late restenosis, but was similar to patched CEA in both early and late outcomes. This updated meta-analysis suggests that early and late outcomes following cCEA are similar to eCEA, provided the arteriotomy is patched.
METHODS: This was a systematic review of PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases for RCTs and observational studies (OSs) comparing eCEA with cCEA. A sensitivity analysis was also performed using data from OSs with a Newcastle-Ottawa score >5.
RESULTS: There were 25 eligible studies (5 RCTs, 20 OSs) involving 49,500 CEAs (16,249 eCEAs; 33,251 cCEAs). RCT data: Compared with cCEA, eCEA did not confer significant reductions in 30 day stroke, death, death/stroke, death/stroke/MI, or neck haematoma. However, eCEA was associated with reduced late restenosis (OR 0.40; p = .001). OS data: eCEA was associated with significant reductions in 30 day death (OR 0.46; p < .0001), stroke (OR 0.58; p < .0001), death/stroke (OR 0.52; p < .0001), death/stroke/MI (OR 0.50; p < .0001), and late restenosis (OR 0.49; p = .032) compared with cCEA. RCT and OS data combined: eCEA was associated with significant reductions in 30 day death (OR 0.55; p < .0001), stroke (OR 0.63; p = .004), death/stroke (OR 0.58; p < .0001), and late restenosis (OR 0.45; p = .004) compared with cCEA. eCEA vs. patched cCEA (RCT and OS data): There were no differences between the two procedures except for neck haematoma, where eCEA was better than patched cCEA.
CONCLUSIONS: Using combined RCT and OS data, eCEA was superior to cCEA regarding peri-operative outcomes (stroke, death, death/stroke) and late restenosis, but was similar to patched CEA in both early and late outcomes. This updated meta-analysis suggests that early and late outcomes following cCEA are similar to eCEA, provided the arteriotomy is patched.