Niamh Hynes1, Edel P Kavanagh1, Sherif Sultan1,2, Fionnuala Jordan3. 1. Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, The Galway Clinic, Galway, Ireland. 2. Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University College Hospital, Galway, Ireland. 3. School of Nursing and Midwifery, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cervical artery dissection (CeAD) is a pathological bleed or tear, or both, in the wall of the carotid or vertebral arteries as they course through the neck, and is a leading cause of stroke in young people. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of surgical and radiological interventions versus best medical treatment alone for treating symptomatic cervical artery dissection. SEARCH METHODS: We performed comprehensive searches of the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched March 2020), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), 2020, Issue 4, in the Cochrane Library (searched March 2020), MEDLINE (1946 to March 2020) and Embase (1974 to March 2020). We searched relevant ongoing trials and research registers (searched March 2020), checked references in all relevant papers for additional eligible studies, and contacted authors and researchers in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) of either surgical or endovascular intervention for the management of symptomatic CeAD were eligible for inclusion. Only studies with anticoagulants or antiplatelet treatment as the control group were included. Two review authors planned to independently extract data. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Primary outcomes were ipsilateral stroke and disability. Secondary outcomes were death, any stroke, or transient ischaemic attack, residual stenosis (> 50%), recurrence of cervical dissection, expanding pseudoaneurysm, or major bleeding. We analysed the studies according to the first choice of treatment. We planned to assess for risk of bias and apply GRADE criteria for any included studies. MAIN RESULTS: We did not find any completed RCTs or CCTs undertaken in this area of research. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: No RCTs or CCTs compared either surgery or endovascular therapy with control. Thus, there is no available evidence to support their use for the treatment of extracranial cervical artery dissection in addition to antithrombotic therapy in people who continue to have neurological symptoms when treated with antithrombotic therapy alone.
BACKGROUND: Cervical artery dissection (CeAD) is a pathological bleed or tear, or both, in the wall of the carotid or vertebral arteries as they course through the neck, and is a leading cause of stroke in young people. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of surgical and radiological interventions versus best medical treatment alone for treating symptomatic cervical artery dissection. SEARCH METHODS: We performed comprehensive searches of the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched March 2020), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), 2020, Issue 4, in the Cochrane Library (searched March 2020), MEDLINE (1946 to March 2020) and Embase (1974 to March 2020). We searched relevant ongoing trials and research registers (searched March 2020), checked references in all relevant papers for additional eligible studies, and contacted authors and researchers in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) of either surgical or endovascular intervention for the management of symptomatic CeAD were eligible for inclusion. Only studies with anticoagulants or antiplatelet treatment as the control group were included. Two review authors planned to independently extract data. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Primary outcomes were ipsilateral stroke and disability. Secondary outcomes were death, any stroke, or transient ischaemic attack, residual stenosis (> 50%), recurrence of cervical dissection, expanding pseudoaneurysm, or major bleeding. We analysed the studies according to the first choice of treatment. We planned to assess for risk of bias and apply GRADE criteria for any included studies. MAIN RESULTS: We did not find any completed RCTs or CCTs undertaken in this area of research. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: No RCTs or CCTs compared either surgery or endovascular therapy with control. Thus, there is no available evidence to support their use for the treatment of extracranial cervical artery dissection in addition to antithrombotic therapy in people who continue to have neurological symptoms when treated with antithrombotic therapy alone.
Authors: Thomas G Brott; Jonathan L Halperin; Suhny Abbara; J Michael Bacharach; John D Barr; Ruth L Bush; Christopher U Cates; Mark A Creager; Susan B Fowler; Gary Friday; Vicki S Hertzberg; E Bruce McIff; Wesley S Moore; Peter D Panagos; Thomas S Riles; Robert H Rosenwasser; Allen J Taylor Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2011-02-01 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Jin Yang Joo; Jung Yong Ahn; Young Sun Chung; In Bo Han; Sang Sup Chung; Pyeong Ho Yoon; Sang Heum Kim; Eun Wan Choi Journal: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Date: 2005 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.740
Authors: G Marnat; I Mourand; O Eker; P Machi; C Arquizan; C Riquelme; X Ayrignac; A Bonafé; V Costalat Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2016-03-10 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Stefan T Engelter; Caspar Grond-Ginsbach; Tiina M Metso; Antti J Metso; Manja Kloss; Stephanie Debette; Didier Leys; Armin Grau; Jean Dallongeville; Marie Bodenant; Yves Samson; Valeria Caso; Alessandro Pezzini; Leo H Bonati; Vincent Thijs; Henrik Gensicke; Juan J Martin; Anna Bersano; Emmanuel Touzé; Turgut Tatlisumak; Philippe A Lyrer; Tobias Brandt Journal: Neurology Date: 2013-05-01 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Hakan Sarikaya; Bruno R da Costa; Ralf W Baumgartner; Kathleen Duclos; Emmanuel Touzé; Jean M de Bray; Antti Metso; Tiina Metso; Marcel Arnold; Antonio Arauz; Marcel Zwahlen; Peter Jüni Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-09-05 Impact factor: 3.240