首页> 外文OA文献 >Morphological suitability for endovascular repair, non-intervention rates, and operative mortality in women and men assessed for intact abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: systematic reviews with meta-analysis
【2h】

Morphological suitability for endovascular repair, non-intervention rates, and operative mortality in women and men assessed for intact abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: systematic reviews with meta-analysis

机译:评估完整腹主动脉瘤修复的女性和男性的血管内修复,非干预率和手术死亡率的形态适应性:meta分析的系统评价

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Background: Prognosis for women with abdominal aortic aneurysm might be worse than the prognosis for men. We aimed to systematically quantify the differences in outcomes between men and women being assessed for repair of intact abdominal aortic aneurysm using data from study periods after the year 2000. Methods: In these systematic reviews and meta-analysis, we identified studies (randomised, cohort, or cross-sectional) by searching MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and grey literature published between Jan 1, 2005, and Sept 2, 2016, for two systematic reviews and Jan 1, 2009, and Sept 2, 2016, for one systematic review. Studies were included if they were of both men and women, with data presented for each sex separately, with abdominal aortic aneurysms being assessed for aneurysm repair by either endovascular repair (EVAR) or open repair. We conducted three reviews based on whether studies reported the proportion morphologically suitable (within manufacturers' instructions for use) for EVAR (EVAR suitability review), non-intervention rates (non-intervention review), and 30-day mortality (operative mortality review) after intact aneurysm repair. Studies had to include at least 20 women (for the EVAR suitability review), 20 women (for the non-intervention review), and 50 women (for the operative mortality review). Studies were excluded if they were review articles, editorials, letters, or case reports. For the operative review, studies were also excluded if they only provided hazard ratios or only reported in-hospital mortality. We assessed the quality of the studies using the Newcastle–Ottawa scoring system, and contacted authors for the provision of additional data if needed. We combined results across studies by random-effects meta-analysis. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42016043227. Findings: Five studies assessed the morphological eligibility for EVAR (1507 men, 400 women). The overall pooled proportion of women eligible (34%) for EVAR was lower than it was in men (54%; odds ratio [OR] 0·44, 95% CI 0·32–0·62). Four single-centre studies reported non-intervention rates (1365 men, 247 women). The overall pooled non-intervention rates were higher in women (34%) than men (19%; OR 2·27, 95% CI 1·21–4·23). The review of 30-day mortality included nine studies (52 018 men, 11 076 women). The overall pooled estimate for EVAR was higher in women (2·3%) than in men (1·4%; OR 1·67, 95% CI 1·38–2·04). The overall estimate for open repair also was higher in women (5·4%) than in men (2·8%; OR 1·76, 95% CI 1·35–2·30). Interpretation: Compared with men, a smaller proportion of women are eligible for EVAR, a higher proportion of women are not offered intervention, and operative mortality is much higher in women for both EVAR and open repair. The management of abdominal aortic aneurysm in women needs improvement.
机译:背景:腹主动脉瘤女性的预后可能比男性预后差。我们的目标是使用2000年以后的研究数据来系统地量化接受评估腹主动脉瘤修复的男女之间的结局差异。方法:在这些系统的回顾和荟萃分析中,我们确定了研究(随机,队列(或横截面),方法是搜索2005年1月1日至2016年9月2日之间发表的MEDLINE,Embase,CENTRAL和灰色文献进行两次系统评价,以及2009年1月1日至2016年9月2日进行一次系统评价。包括男性和女性的研究,分别提供每种性别的数据,并通过血管内修复(EVAR)或开放性修复评估腹主动脉瘤的动脉瘤修复。我们根据研究是否报告了形态上适合EVAR的比例(在制造商使用说明内)(EVAR适用性审查),非干预率(非干预审查)和30天死亡率(手术死亡率审查),进行了3​​次审查完整的动脉瘤修复后。研究必须包括至少20名妇女(用于EVAR适用性审查),20名妇女(用于非干预性审查)和50名妇女(用于手术死亡率审查)。如果研究是评论文章,社论,信件或病例报告,则将其排除在外。对于手术回顾,如果研究仅提供危险比或仅报告住院死亡率,则也将其排除在外。我们使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华评分系统评估了研究质量,并在需要时联系作者以提供更多数据。我们通过随机效应荟萃分析将研究结果合并在一起。该研究已在PROSPERO注册,编号为CRD42016043227。调查结果:五项研究评估了EVAR的形态学合格性(男性1507人,女性400人)。符合EVAR标准的女性总比例(34%)低于男性(54%;优势比[OR] 0·44,95%CI 0·32-0·62)。四项单中心研究报告了非干预率(男性1365名,女性247名)。女性(34%)的总体不干预率高于男性(19%; OR 2·27,95%CI 1·21–4·23)。 30天死亡率的回顾研究包括9项研究(男性52 018例,女性11 076例)。女性(2·3%)的EVAR总体汇总估计高于男性(1·4%; OR 1·67,95%CI 1·38-2·04)。女性(5·4%)比男性(2·8%; OR 1·76,95%CI 1·35-2·30)的开放式修复总体估计数也更高。解释:与男性相比,有较小比例的女性有资格接受EVAR,较高比例的女性没有接受干预,而EVAR和开放式手术的女性手术死亡率要高得多。女性腹主动脉瘤的治疗需要改善。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

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