CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 77Abdominal vascular conditions and treatmentsOmental and Epiploic ConditionsAppendicitis Diagnosis and Management

Mortality after acute primary mesenteric infarction: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of observational studies

Adaba, F., Askari, A., Dastur, J., Patel, A., Gabe, S. M., Vaizey, C. J., Faiz, O., Nightingale, J. M. D. +1 more·2015·Colorectal Disease
DOI 10.1111/codi.12938
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Aim: The primary aim of this study was to determine whether the in‐hospital mortality for acute mesenteric infarction has reduced in the last decade. The secondary aim was to determine if there was a statistical difference in mortality between patients having acute primary mesenteric infarction due to different causes. Method: A literature search was performed of PubMed, Ovid (Embase) and Google Scholar databases. Studies on acute mesenteric infarction of primary vascular pathology were included for pooled analyses while studies that had reported comparative mortality between arterial, venous and non‐occlusive mesenteric infarction (NOMI) were included in meta‐analyses. Their quality was assessed using the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence assessment scale. Odds ratios (ORs) of mortality were calculated using a Mantel−Haenszel random effect model. Results: The total number of patients was 4527 and the male/female ratio was 1912/2247. The pooled in‐hospital mortality was 63%. There was no significant reduction of in‐hospital mortality rate in the last decade (P = 0.78). There was a significant difference in in‐hospital mortality between acute arterial mesenteric infarction (73.9%) compared with acute venous mesenteric infarction (41.7%) [OR 3.47, confidence interval (CI) 2.43−4.96, P < 0.001] and NOMI (68.5%) compared with acute venous mesenteric infarction (44.2%) (OR 3.2, CI 1.83−5.6, P < 0.001). There was no difference in mortality between acute arterial mesenteric infarction and NOMI (OR 1.08, CI 0.57−2.03, P = 0.82). Conclusion: In‐hospital mortality rate has not changed in the last decade. Patients with arterial mesenteric infarction or with NOMI are over three times more likely to die during the first hospital admission compared with those with venous mesenteric infarction.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/codi.12938

Cites

62 of 62 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?

  • Mortality was higher in acute arterial mesenteric infarction (73.9%) and NOMI (68.5%) compared to acute mesenteric venous infarction (44.2%).

    “Mortality was higher in acute arterial mesenteric infarction (73.9%) and NOMI (68.5% as compared to acute mesenteric venous infarction (44.2%)[122].”

    From Ischemic bowel disease in 2021. (2021) · cites this paper as [122]

  • Adaba et al. found in a meta-analysis of observational studies in patients with acute mesenteric infarction that the pooled in-hospital mortality was 63%.

    “Adaba et al[122] did a meta-analysis of observational studies in patients with acute mesenteric infarction and found that the pooled in-hospital mortality was 63%.”

    From Ischemic bowel disease in 2021. (2021) · cites this paper as [122]

  • The mortality data in the present review are in accordance with two earlier systematic reviews.

    “The mortality data in the present review are, however, in accordance with two earlier systematic reviews.”

    From Incidence and outcomes of acute mesenteric ischaemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2022) · cites this paper as [5]

  • A review of 54 studies from 1956 to 2012 found in-hospital mortality of approximately 60% in studies published from 2002 to 2012, and suggested a slight reduction in mortality over time.

    “A review of 54 studies from 1956 to 2012 found in-hospital mortality of approximately 60% in the studies published from 2002 to 2012, and suggested a slight reduction in mortality over time.5”

    From Incidence and outcomes of acute mesenteric ischaemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2022) · cites this paper as [5]

  • Adaba et al calculated a pooled mortality of 63% from 52 articles published from 1956 to 2012.

    “and Adaba et al.5 63% from 52 articles published from 1956 to 2012.”

    From Incidence and outcomes of acute mesenteric ischaemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2022) · cites this paper as [5]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 64 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Adaba, F., Askari, A., Dastur, J., Patel, A., Gabe, S. M., Vaizey, C. J., Faiz, O., Nightingale, J. M. D., & Warusavitarne, J.
Affiliations
St Mark's Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Adaba, F.
ORCID
Venue
Colorectal Disease
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-06-22
Volume
17
Issue
7
Pages
566-577
ISSN
  • 1462-8910 (ISSN-L)
  • 1463-1318
DOI
10.1111/codi.12938
OpenAlex
W2021307692
Cited by
77
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 10 · 2016: 1
FWCI
0.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • Colorectal Disease (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Abdominal vascular conditions and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Omental and Epiploic Conditions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Appendicitis Diagnosis and Management
Keywords
in-hospital mortality, mortality trends
MeSH terms
Acute Disease, Female, Humans, Infarction, Intestines, Male, Mesenteric Arteries, Mesenteric Veins, Mesentery, Hospital Mortality, Observational Studies as Topic, 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