The Diagnostic Value of Biomarkers in Acute Mesenteric Ischaemia Is Insufficiently Substantiated: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: There is an urgent need for accurate biomarkers to support timely diagnosis of acute mesenteric ischaemia (AMI) and thereby improve clinical outcomes. With this systematic review, the aim was to substantiate the potential diagnostic value of biomarkers for arterial occlusive AMI. DATA SOURCES: The Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library electronic databases were searched. REVIEW METHODS: A systematic review of the literature has been conducted to define the potential diagnostic value of biomarkers for arterial occlusive AMI. All studies including ≥ 10 patients describing biomarkers for macrovascular occlusive AMI between 1950 and 17 February 2023 were identified within the Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library electronic databases. There were no restrictions to any particular study design, but letters and editorials were excluded. The QUADAS-2 tool was used for the critical appraisal of quality. The study protocol was registered on Prospero (CRD42021254970). RESULTS: Fifty of 4334 studies were eligible for inclusion in this review. Ninety per cent of studies were of low quality. A total of 60 biomarkers were identified, with 24 in two or more studies and 15 in five or more studies. There was variation in reported units, normal range, and cut off values. Meta-analysis was not possible due to study heterogeneity. Biomarkers currently recommended by the European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, European Society for Trauma and Emergency Surgery 2016, and World Society of Emergency Surgery 2017 guidelines also had heterogeneous low quality data for use in the diagnosis of AMI. CONCLUSION: This systematic review demonstrates high heterogeneity and low quality of the available evidence on biomarkers for arterial occlusive AMI. No clinical conclusions can be drawn on a biomarker or combination of biomarkers for patients suspected of arterial occlusive AMI. Restraint is advised when rejecting or determining AMI solely based on biomarkers.

Systematic Review of the Efficacy of Treatment for Median Arcuate Ligament Syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: Since the first description of the median arcuate ligament syndrome (MALS), the existence for the syndrome and the efficacy of treatment for it have been questioned. METHODS: A systematic review conforming to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement was conducted, with a broader view on treatment for MALS including any kind of coeliac artery release, coeliac plexus resection, and coeliac plexus blockage, irrespective of age. Online databases were used to identify papers published between 1963 and July 2021. The inclusion criteria were abdominal symptoms, proof of MALS on imaging, and articles reporting at least three patients. Primary outcomes were symptom relief and quality of life (QoL). RESULTS: Thirty-eight studies describing 880 adult patients and six studies describing 195 paediatric patients were included. The majority of the adult studies reported symptom relief of more than 70% from three to 228 months after treatment. Two adult studies showed an improved QoL after treatment. Half of the paediatric studies reported symptom relief of more than 70% from six to 62 months after laparoscopic coeliac artery release, and four studies reported an improved QoL. Thirty-five (92%) adult studies and five (83%) paediatric studies scored a high or unclear risk of bias for the majority of the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) items. The meaning of coeliac plexus resection or blockage could not be substantiated. CONCLUSION: This systematic review suggests a sustainable symptom relief of more than 70% after treatment for MALS in the majority of adult and paediatric studies; however, owing to the heterogeneity of the inclusion criteria and outcome parameters, the risk of bias was high and a formal meta-analysis could not be performed. To improve care for patients with MALS the next steps would be to deal with reporting standards, outcome definitions, and consensus descriptions of the intervention(s), after which an appropriate randomised controlled trial should be performed.

Retrograde open mesenteric stenting for acute mesenteric ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: Acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) encompasses the sequels of end-stage untreated chronic mesenteric ischemia and acute mesenteric artery thrombosis. Percutaneous mesenteric artery stenting (PMAS) is the preferred treatment of patients with AMI but is not always feasible. Retrograde open mesenteric stenting (ROMS) is a hybrid technique that combines the advantages of open surgical and endovascular approaches. The literature on the results of this new technique is scarce. The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of ROMS in a consecutive series of patients with AMI. METHODS: All patients with emergent mesenteric revascularization for AMI between January 2007 and September 2011 were entered in our prospective registry. Technical success, mortality, patency, clinical success, and complication rate at 30 days and 6 and 12 months were assessed. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients presented with AMI and 54 underwent PMAS, of which four were unsuccessful and followed by ROMS. Eleven patients were directly treated with ROMS, making a total of 15 patients (10 women and five men; median age, 66 years [interquartile range, 54-73 years]). In all patients, only the superior mesenteric artery was revascularized. In nine of the 15 patients, all three mesenteric arteries were severely stenotic or occluded. Technical success was achieved in 14 patients. At ROMS in two patients, the small bowel was severely ischemic. One of these patients needed a partial bowel resection because of irreversible transmural ischemia. At 30 days, the mortality rate was 20% and the primary patency was 92%. Ten patients underwent unplanned relaparotomy, of whom one needed resection of a large part of the small bowel. At 12 months, the mortality rate was still 20%. The primary patency was 83%. Primary assisted patency was 91%, and secondary patency was 100%. Clinical success at 30 days, 6 months, and 12 months, respectively, was 73%, 67%, and 67%. CONCLUSIONS: AMI is still a devastating event. If PMAS is not feasible, ROMS is a reliable alternative and is associated with a relatively low mortality and morbidity rate.

Mesenteric vascular treatment 2016: from open surgical repair to endovascular revascularization.

The rise of endovascular techniques has improved the outcome of mesenteric ischemia. Key principle in reduction of morbidity and mortality is "revascularization first, resection later". We believe that mesenteric ischemia is a clinical challenge demanding 24/7 multidisciplinary team availability. This article describes the current insights into treatment of mesenteric ischemia.

[From CVA or TIA to carotid surgery: the clinical treatment course for patients with symptomatic carotid disease could be shorter]. / Van CVA of TIA tot carotischirurgie: zorgtraject voor patiënten met symptomatisch carotislijden kan korter.

OBJECTIVE: To gain insight into the duration and the various components of the clinical treatment course for patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis, in order to improve the care provided to these patients. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: All patients who had undergone a carotid intervention for significant symptomatic carotid stenosis from 2001 to 2011 were included. Quantile regression analysis was used to assess the changes which had occurred in the median duration of the period from neurological event to intervention from 2001 onward. In order to chart the clinical treatment course, it was split up in different components. In addition, the impact of the referrer and the relationship between the time of the intervention and the risk of perioperative complications were also evaluated. RESULTS: The median duration of the entire clinical treatment course decreased during the study period from 79 days (interquartile range (IQR): 59-113) in the reference period 2001-2004 to 19 days (IQR: 13-28) in 2011. All components of the clinical pathway had contributed to this decline. The duration of the clinical course in patients who had been externally referred was more than 3 times longer (median 67 vs. 21 days, p < 0.01). The total duration of the process did not affect the number of perioperative complications. CONCLUSION: In the last decennium, the duration of the clinical treatment course of care in patients with symptomatic carotid artery disease was greatly reduced. Analyses of the processes which make up the chain of events, however, reveal that there is still much to be gained in the period before initial presentation at the hospital for patients who are referred by their general practitioners as well as those referred by other hospitals.