Cited by 27Abdominal vascular conditions and treatmentsAppendicitis Diagnosis and ManagementIntestinal and Peritoneal Adhesions

Open and endovascular management of acute mesenteric ischaemia: a systematic review

Murphy, B., Dejong, C. H. C., Winter, D. C.·2019·World Journal of Surgery

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Acute mesenteric ischaemia (AMI) is a life-threatening surgical emergency resulting from thromboembolic occlusion of the mesenteric vasculature. Traditional management of AMI has been open revascularisation with or without bowel resection-a procedure which carries considerable morbidity and mortality in an already unwell, compromised patient. Endovascular and more minimally invasive management approaches to AMI have been reported. Proponents of endovascular management suggest this approach may be associated with reduced morbidity and mortality compared with open surgery. OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of endovascular approach for AMI on mortality and need for subsequent laparotomy and/or bowel resection. DATA SOURCES: The search bodies PubMed and Medline were interrogated. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: All studies in English with greater than 10 patients examining outcomes for patients undergoing endovascular intervention for acute mesenteric ischaemia were included. All patients over 18 years presenting with a diagnosis of acute mesenteric ischaemia secondary to an arterial thromboembolic source were included. Studies examining endovascular intervention alone or endovascular and open intervention were selected. RESULTS: The 30-day mortality for endovascular approach from all 13 studies was 16-42%. Of the 7 comparative studies including results of open revascularisation, the 30-day mortality for patient treated with an endovascular approach was 15-39% versus 33-50% for open revascularisation. Laparotomy rates post-initial endovascular intervention ranged from 13 to 73%. Bowel resection post-endovascular therapy ranged from 14 to 40% among studies. Concerning 7 comparative studies for open versus endovascular revascularisation, the rate of bowel resection in the endovascular group ranged 14-28% and 33-63% in the open cohort. Endovascular intervention also demonstrated lower median length (s) of bowel resected. LIMITATIONS: Heterogeneity of studies and patient populations studied including selection bias. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF FINDINGS: Endovascular management may be associated with reduced mortality and need for/length of bowel resection compared with the traditional open approach, but there remains a paucity of robust data to support this. The available literature illustrates that a subgroup of patients without haemodynamic compromise and more insidious onset may garner benefit from endovascular intervention.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00268-019-05149-x

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Murphy, B., Dejong, C. H. C., & Winter, D. C.
Affiliations
  • St. Vincent's University Hospital (IE)
  • Maastricht University (NL)
Corresponding author
Murphy, B.
Venue
World Journal of Surgery
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-09-03
Volume
43
Issue
12
Pages
3224-3231
ISSN
  • 0364-2313 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-2323
OpenAlex
W2971863293
Cited by
27
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2
FWCI
0.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • World Journal of Surgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Abdominal vascular conditions and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Appendicitis Diagnosis and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Intestinal and Peritoneal Adhesions
Keywords
acute mesenteric ischemia, endovascular revascularization, bowel resection, 30-day mortality, laparotomy, minimally invasive surgery, surgical outcomes comparison, hemodynamic instability
MeSH terms
Acute Disease, Humans, Endovascular Procedures, Mesenteric Ischemia

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review