Angioplasty versus stenting for subclavian artery stenosis.

BACKGROUND: The subclavian arteries are two major arteries of the upper chest, below the collar bone, which come from the arch of the aorta. Endovascular treatment for stenosis of the subclavian arteries includes angioplasty alone, and with stenting. There is insufficient evidence to guide the use of stents following angioplasty for subclavian artery stenosis. This is the second update of a review first published in 2011. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review was to determine whether stenting was more effective than angioplasty alone for stenosis of the subclavian artery. SEARCH METHODS: For this update, the Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and LILACS databases, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 2 February 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for randomised controlled trials of endovascular treatment of subclavian artery lesions that compared angioplasty alone and stent implantation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently evaluated studies to assess eligibility. Discrepancies were resolved by discussion. If there was no agreement, we asked a third review author to assess the study for inclusion. We planned to undertake data collection and analysis in accordance with recommendations described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, and assess the certainty of the evidence using a GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: To date, we have not identified any completed or ongoing randomised controlled trials that compare percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting for subclavian artery stenosis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently insufficient evidence to determine whether stenting is more effective than angioplasty alone for stenosis of the subclavian artery.

Angioplasty versus stenting for subclavian artery stenosis.

BACKGROUND: There is insufficient evidence to guide stent usage following angioplasty in subclavian artery stenosis. This is an update of a review first published in 2011. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review was to determine whether stenting is more effective than angioplasty alone for stenosis of the subclavian artery. SEARCH METHODS: For this update the Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Specialised Register (last searched February 2014) and CENTRAL (2014, Issue 1). There was no restriction on language. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of endovascular treatment of subclavian artery lesions comparing angioplasty alone and stent implantation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently evaluated studies to assess eligibility. Discrepancies were resolved by discussion. If there was no agreement, the third author was asked to assess the study for inclusion. MAIN RESULTS: To date we have not identified any completed or ongoing randomised controlled trials comparing percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting for subclavian artery stenosis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently insufficient evidence to determine whether stenting is more effective than angioplasty alone for stenosis of the subclavian artery.

Contribuição da densidade do PSA para predizer o câncer da próstata em pacientes com valores de PSA entre 2, 6 e 10, 0 ng/ml / Contribution of PSA density in the prediction of prostate cancer in patients with PSA values between 2.6 and 10.0 ng/ml

OBJETIVO: Estudar o perfil dos pacientes submetidos a biópsia prostática, determinando possíveis padrões que, associados aos níveis de PSA entre 2,6 e 10,0 ng/ml, possam levar a uma diminuição de biópsias desnecessárias. MATERIAIS E MÉTODOS: De 2007 a 2009, foi realizado um estudo transversal com 1.282 indivíduos submetidos a biópsia prostática e que apresentavam níveis de PSA entre 2,6 e 10,0 ng/ml. RESULTADOS: A prevalência de câncer foi de 28,6 por cento. Pacientes com câncer eram, em média, mais idosos, com valores de PSA e densidade de PSA mais altos e menor volume da próstata. Na análise da densidade de PSA, os pacientes com câncer tiveram média de 0,31 ng/ml/cc, enquanto nos pacientes com resultado negativo a média foi de 0,10 ng/ml/cc. Utilizando como critério de positividade para câncer o ponto de corte de densidade de PSA de 0,15 ng/ml/cc, obtivemos especificidade de 74 por cento e sensibilidade de 70 por cento. Para aumentar a sensibilidade é preciso reduzir o ponto de corte. Com o valor 0,09 ng/ml/cc, obtivemos sensibilidade de 84 por cento (IC 95 por cento: 80-87 por cento) e especificidade de 75 por cento (IC 95 por cento: 72-78 por cento). CONCLUSÃO: O uso sistemático da densidade de PSA na indicação de prosseguimento da investigação do paciente com biópsia poderia reduzir a quantidade de procedimentos desnecessários.

OBJECTIVE: To study the profile of patients with PSA level between 2.6 and 10.0 ng/ml and submitted to prostate biopsy, determining possible patterns that might lead to a reduction of unnecessary biopsies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the period from 2007 to 2009, a cross-sectional study was developed with 1,282 patients with PSA levels between 2.6 and 10.0 ng/ml, and submitted to prostate biopsy. RESULTS: Cancer prevalence was 28.6 percent. On average, the patients with positive biopsies were older, with higher PSA levels and density, and smaller prostate volume as compared with the patients with negative biopsies. In the analysis of PSA density, the cancer patients averaged 0.31 ng/ml/cc, while patients with negative results averaged 0.10 ng/ml/cc. Utilizing a cutoff value of 0.15 ng/ml/cc for PSA density as a cancer positiveness criterion, the authors obtained sensitivity of 74 percent and specificity of 70 percent. The cutoff value should be reduced to increase the sensitivity. With a cutoff value of 0.09 ng/ml/cc, sensitivity reached 84 percent (CI 95 percent: 80-87 percent), and specificity, 75 percent (CI 95 percent: 72-78 percent). CONCLUSION: The systematic use of PSA density as an indicator to proceed with the investigation of a patient with biopsy could substantially reduce the amount of unnecessary procedures.