Cargando…
Efficacy and safety of endovascular coiling vs surgical clipping for patients with ruptured carotid-ophthalmic aneurysm: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: Carotid-ophthalmic aneurysms are relatively rare, and represent 1% of all intracranial aneurysms. Generally, endovascular coiling and surgical clipping are the 2 most commonly used methods to treat ruptured carotid-ophthalmic aneurysms, it provides the most favorable outcome for a patien...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7676553/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33217840 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000023235 |
_version_ | 1783611794675204096 |
---|---|
author | Feng, Guan-Jun Gao, Feng Huang, Xiao-Yuan Hati, Paer Yang, Xiao-Peng Wu, Hong-Xing |
author_facet | Feng, Guan-Jun Gao, Feng Huang, Xiao-Yuan Hati, Paer Yang, Xiao-Peng Wu, Hong-Xing |
author_sort | Feng, Guan-Jun |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Carotid-ophthalmic aneurysms are relatively rare, and represent 1% of all intracranial aneurysms. Generally, endovascular coiling and surgical clipping are the 2 most commonly used methods to treat ruptured carotid-ophthalmic aneurysms, it provides the most favorable outcome for a patient. This study aims to assess the efficiency and safety of endovascular coiling vs surgical clipping for patients with a ruptured carotid-ophthalmic aneurysm. METHODS: A comprehensive systematic literature review was done in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and WanFang databases. Only randomized trials that compared endovascular coiling with surgical clipping in patients with ruptured carotid-ophthalmic aneurysm was included. Data was extracted independently by 2 review authors. Moreover, the quality of study and bias risk was evaluated by utilizing an appropriate method. Triallists will be contacted to acquire missing information. The data is presented as risk ratio and mean difference, or standardized mean difference with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: The results from the present research shall be published in a peer-reviewed journal. CONCLUSION: The present study summarizes the direct and in-direct evidence to judge the efficiency and safety of these 2 methodologies to treat ruptured carotid-ophthalmic aneurysms and attempt to find the most efficiency and safety therapeutical method. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The present study is a meta-analysis based on published evidence. As a result, ethics approval and patient consent are not needed. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7676553 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-76765532020-11-24 Efficacy and safety of endovascular coiling vs surgical clipping for patients with ruptured carotid-ophthalmic aneurysm: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis Feng, Guan-Jun Gao, Feng Huang, Xiao-Yuan Hati, Paer Yang, Xiao-Peng Wu, Hong-Xing Medicine (Baltimore) 3700 BACKGROUND: Carotid-ophthalmic aneurysms are relatively rare, and represent 1% of all intracranial aneurysms. Generally, endovascular coiling and surgical clipping are the 2 most commonly used methods to treat ruptured carotid-ophthalmic aneurysms, it provides the most favorable outcome for a patient. This study aims to assess the efficiency and safety of endovascular coiling vs surgical clipping for patients with a ruptured carotid-ophthalmic aneurysm. METHODS: A comprehensive systematic literature review was done in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and WanFang databases. Only randomized trials that compared endovascular coiling with surgical clipping in patients with ruptured carotid-ophthalmic aneurysm was included. Data was extracted independently by 2 review authors. Moreover, the quality of study and bias risk was evaluated by utilizing an appropriate method. Triallists will be contacted to acquire missing information. The data is presented as risk ratio and mean difference, or standardized mean difference with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: The results from the present research shall be published in a peer-reviewed journal. CONCLUSION: The present study summarizes the direct and in-direct evidence to judge the efficiency and safety of these 2 methodologies to treat ruptured carotid-ophthalmic aneurysms and attempt to find the most efficiency and safety therapeutical method. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The present study is a meta-analysis based on published evidence. As a result, ethics approval and patient consent are not needed. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2020-11-20 /pmc/articles/PMC7676553/ /pubmed/33217840 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000023235 Text en Copyright © 2020 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
spellingShingle | 3700 Feng, Guan-Jun Gao, Feng Huang, Xiao-Yuan Hati, Paer Yang, Xiao-Peng Wu, Hong-Xing Efficacy and safety of endovascular coiling vs surgical clipping for patients with ruptured carotid-ophthalmic aneurysm: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Efficacy and safety of endovascular coiling vs surgical clipping for patients with ruptured carotid-ophthalmic aneurysm: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Efficacy and safety of endovascular coiling vs surgical clipping for patients with ruptured carotid-ophthalmic aneurysm: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Efficacy and safety of endovascular coiling vs surgical clipping for patients with ruptured carotid-ophthalmic aneurysm: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Efficacy and safety of endovascular coiling vs surgical clipping for patients with ruptured carotid-ophthalmic aneurysm: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Efficacy and safety of endovascular coiling vs surgical clipping for patients with ruptured carotid-ophthalmic aneurysm: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | efficacy and safety of endovascular coiling vs surgical clipping for patients with ruptured carotid-ophthalmic aneurysm: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | 3700 |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7676553/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33217840 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000023235 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT fengguanjun efficacyandsafetyofendovascularcoilingvssurgicalclippingforpatientswithrupturedcarotidophthalmicaneurysmaprotocolforsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT gaofeng efficacyandsafetyofendovascularcoilingvssurgicalclippingforpatientswithrupturedcarotidophthalmicaneurysmaprotocolforsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT huangxiaoyuan efficacyandsafetyofendovascularcoilingvssurgicalclippingforpatientswithrupturedcarotidophthalmicaneurysmaprotocolforsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT hatipaer efficacyandsafetyofendovascularcoilingvssurgicalclippingforpatientswithrupturedcarotidophthalmicaneurysmaprotocolforsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT yangxiaopeng efficacyandsafetyofendovascularcoilingvssurgicalclippingforpatientswithrupturedcarotidophthalmicaneurysmaprotocolforsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT wuhongxing efficacyandsafetyofendovascularcoilingvssurgicalclippingforpatientswithrupturedcarotidophthalmicaneurysmaprotocolforsystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |