RESUMO
Background: Cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) is a rare thrombotic condition which is traditionally treated with anti-coagulation therapy. Subsets of patients with severe CVT have been treated with endovascular thrombectomy (EVT). Despite the high estimated mortality associated with severe CVT, there has been only one randomized control trial done regarding safety and efficacy of EVT in severe CVT compared to standard medical management. Evidence in this area is lacking. Objective: The aim of this systematic review is to analyze all existing literature and generate robust information regarding the role of EVT in the management of patients with severe CVT. Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis followed PRISMA guideline. PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, and CNKI were searched for eligible studies from 2007 to 2021. Safety and efficacy of EVT were evaluated by meta-analyzing recanalization status, the good functional outcome at follow-up, recurrent CVT, new hematoma. A pooled proportion with a 95% confidence interval was derived from a meta-analysis of various outcomes (CI). Results: A total of 33 studies comprising 610 patients treated with EVT were included for analysis which comprised one randomized control trial, one prospective study and 31 retrospective studies. Based on pooled data, 85% of patients had good functional outcome, 62% had complete recanalization, 5% had all-cause mortality, and 3% had catheter related complications. The efficacy outcomes in this analysis had a significant heterogeneity and a subgroup analysis was also done to explain these findings. The minimum time of follow up was 3 months and varied EVT techniques were used across the studies. Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests EVT may be safe and efficacious in treating patients with severe CVT. Registration: Our protocol was registered with PROSPERO: International prospective register of systematic reviews with the registration number CRD42021254760.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Autoimmune encephalitis (AE) is a rare but debilitating neurological disease where the body develops antibodies against neuronal cell surface/synaptic proteins. Rituximab is an anti-CD20 chimeric monoclonal antibody which shows promise in AE treatment observational studies. To our knowledge, there has been no previous meta-analysis providing robust evidence on the effectiveness and safety of rituximab as second-line therapy for the treatment for AE. METHODS: This study was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis) statement. Investigators independently searched PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, WANFANG, CNKI, and J-STAGE for studies. Meta-analysis via representative forest plots was conducted for good functional outcome (mRS ≤ 2), proportion of relapse, and mRS score change pre- and post-treatment. RESULTS: Good functional outcome at last follow-up following rituximab therapy occurred in 72.2% of patients (95% CI: 66.3%-77.4%). Mean mRS score decreased by 2.67 (95% CI: 2.04-3.3; P < .001). Relapses following the rituximab therapy occurred in only 14.2% of patients (95% CI: 9.5%-20.8%). Infusion related reactions, pneumonia, and severe sepsis were seen in 29 (15.7%), 11 (6.0%), and two patients (1.1%), respectively. The efficacy and side effect profile of rituximab are comparable to outcomes seen in rituximab use in other autoimmune and inflammatory CNS disease. CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis showed that rituximab is an effective second-line agent for AE with an acceptable toxicity profile.
