4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Surgical management of thrombotic acute intestinal ischemia

期刊

ANNALS OF SURGERY
卷 233, 期 6, 页码 801-808

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/00000658-200106000-00010

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective To evaluate the University of Kentucky experience in treating acute intestinal ischemia to elucidate factors that contribute to survival. Summary Background Data Acute intestinal ischemia is reported to have a poor prognosis, with survival rates ranging from 0% to 40%. This is based on several reports, most of which were published more than a decade ago. Remarkably, there is a paucity of recent studies that report on current outcome for acute mesenteric ischemia. Methods A comparative retrospective analysis was performed on patients who were diagnosed with acute intestinal ischemia between May 1993 and July 2000. Patients were divided into two cohorts: nonthrombotic and thrombotic causes. The latter cohort was subdivided into three etiologic subsets: arterial embolism, arterial thrombosis, and venous thrombosis. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, risk factors, surgical procedures, and survival were analyzed. Survival was compared with a collated historical series. Results Acute intestinal ischemia was diagnosed in 170 patients. The etiologies were nonthrombotic (102/170, 60%), thrombotic (58/170, 34%), or indeterminate (10/170, 6%). In the thrombotic cohort, arterial embolism accounted for 38% (22/58) of the cases, arterial thrombosis for 36% (21/58), and venous thrombosis for 26% (15/58). Patients with venous thrombosis were younger. Venous thrombosis was observed more often in men; arterial thrombosis was more frequent in women. The survival rate was 87% in the venous thrombosis group versus 41% and 38% for arterial embolism and thrombosis, respectively. Compared with the collated historical series, the survival rate was 52% versus 25%. Conclusions These results indicate that the prognosis for patients with acute intestinal ischemia is substantially better than previously reported.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据