...
首页> 外文期刊>European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery: the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery >Editor's choice - Endovascular aneurysm repair versus open repair for patients with a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: A systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term survival
【24h】

Editor's choice - Endovascular aneurysm repair versus open repair for patients with a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: A systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term survival

机译:编辑选择-腹主动脉瘤破裂患者的血管内动脉瘤修复与开放性修复:短期生存的系统评价和荟萃分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Background There is clinical equipoise between open (OR) and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for the best treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA). Objective The aim of the study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the short-term (combined 30-day or in-hospital) survival after EVAR and OR for patients with RAAA. Data sources included Medline, Embase, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry until 13 January 2014. All randomised controlled trials (RCTs), observational cohort studies, and administrative registries comparing OR and EVAR of at least 50 patients were included. Articles were full-length and in English. Methods Standard PRISMA guidelines were followed. The methodological quality of RCTs was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. The quality of observational studies was assessed with a modified Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias, the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies. The results of the RCTs, of the obersvational studies, and of the administrative registries were pooled separately and analysed with the use of a random effects model. Results From a total of 3,769 articles, three RCTs, 21 observational studies, and eight administrative registries met the inclusion criteria. In the RCTs, the risk of bias was lowest and the pooled odds ratio for death after EVAR versus OR was 0.90 (95% CI 0.65-1.24). The majority of the observational studies had a high risk of bias and the pooled odds ratio for death was 0.44 (95% CI 0.37-0.53). The majority of the administrative registries had a high risk of bias and the pooled odds ratio for death was 0.54 (95% CI 0.47-0.62). Conclusion Endovascular aneurysm repair is not inferior to open repair in patients with a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. This supports the use of EVAR in suitable patients and OR as a reasonable alternative.
机译:背景技术开腹(OR)与血管内动脉瘤修复(EVAR)之间存在临床平衡,以最佳方式治疗破裂的腹主动脉瘤(RAAA)。目的本研究的目的是进行系统的回顾和荟萃分析,以评估RAAA患者EVAR和OR后的短期(联合30天或医院内)生存。数据来源包括Medline,Embase和世界卫生组织国际临床试验注册中心(截至2014年1月13日)。所有的随机对照试验(RCT),观察性队列研究和比较至少50例患者OR和EVAR的行政注册均包括在内。文章为全文,以英文撰写。方法遵循PRISMA标准指南。使用Cochrane Collaboration的工具评估偏倚风险来评估RCT的方法学质量。观察性研究的质量通过改进的Cochrane Collaboration评估偏倚风险的工具,纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表和非随机化研究方法学指数进行评估。将RCT,产科研究和行政管理部门的结果分别汇总,并使用随机效应模型进行分析。结果在总共3,769篇文章中,有3项RCT,21项观察性研究和8个行政登记处达到了纳入标准。在随机对照试验中,偏倚的风险最低,EVAR与OR对比后死亡的合并比值比为0.90(95%CI 0.65-1.24)。大多数的观察性研究都有偏见的高风险,合并的死亡几率是0.44(95%CI 0.37-0.53)。大多数行政登记处都有偏见的高风险,合并的死亡几率是0.54(95%CI 0.47-0.62)。结论腹主动脉瘤破裂的患者血管内动脉瘤修复不逊于开放性修复。这支持在合适的患者中使用EVAR,或作为合理的替代方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号