CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 25Abdominal vascular conditions and treatmentsPeripheral Artery Disease ManagementVascular anomalies and interventions

Endovascular Treatment of Chronic Arterial Mesenteric Ischemia: A changing perspective?

Gibbons, C.P., Roberts, D.E.·2010·Seminars in Vascular Surgery
DOI 10.1053/j.semvascsurg.2009.12.006
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Endovascular treatment for chronic mesenteric ischemia is growing in popularity because of its lower periprocedural morbidity and mortality than open surgery. It is especially suitable for the high-risk surgical candidate and for those who have a poor nutritional state, although endovascular surgery may not be possible in patients with ostial occlusions or heavily calcified vessels. A positive response to angioplasty is helpful to secure a diagnosis in patients with slightly atypical symptoms. There are little data at present to suggest that primary stenting is better than angioplasty alone, but insertion of a stent may be valuable as a rescue procedure following dissection, vascular recoil, or thrombosis during angioplasty. The superior mesenteric artery is probably the most important vessel to treat but, where this is impossible, celiac or inferior mesenteric artery dilatation may have therapeutic benefit. However, there is some evidence at present favoring multiple, as opposed to single-vessel, angioplasty or stenting. Long-term patency is better after mesenteric bypass, which may be preferred in the younger and fitter patient. Treatment of the celiac artery compression syndrome is primarily surgical, but stent insertion may have a role as a secondary procedure where there is a residual stenosis after median arcuate ligament division.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1053/j.semvascsurg.2009.12.006

Cites

34 of 34 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?

  • PEVT is safe with less hospital length of stay, low 30-day mortality (3%) and low complication rate (9%).

    “It is safe with less hospital length of stay, low 30 d mortality (3%) and low complication rate (9%)[119].”

    From Ischemic bowel disease in 2021. (2021) · cites this paper as [119]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Gibbons, C. P., & Roberts, D. E.
Affiliations
Morriston Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Gibbons, C.P.
ORCID
Roberts, D.E.
Venue
Seminars in Vascular Surgery
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-03
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
47-53
ISSN
0895-7967 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1053/j.semvascsurg.2009.12.006
OpenAlex
W2056689768
Cited by
25
References
34
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Seminars in Vascular Surgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Abdominal vascular conditions and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Peripheral Artery Disease Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Vascular anomalies and interventions
Keywords
endovascular treatment, angioplasty, stenting, superior mesenteric artery, celiac artery compression, vascular calcification, long-term patency
MeSH terms
Chronic Disease, Humans, Intestines, Ischemia, Mesenteric Vascular Occlusion, Risk Factors, Severity of Illness Index, Vascular Surgical Procedures, Stents, Treatment Outcome, Angioplasty, Risk Assessment, Patient Selection

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