Endovascular revascularization vs open surgical revascularization as the first strategy for arterial acute mesenteric ischemia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract

Objective: This paired meta-analysis aimed to compare the mortality and morbidity of endovascular revascularization (EVR) and open surgical revascularization (OSR) as the first strategy for arterial acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI).

Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed in accordance with the PRISMA statement. A systematic search strategy was performed to identify eligible studies using the following databases: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library database from inception to December 31, 2023, with restriction to the English language. The end search date was January 2, 2024. The primary outcome was short-term mortality. Secondary outcomes included bowel resection, second-look laparotomy, and short bowel syndrome. The counterenhanced funnel plot and the Peters' test were used to assess bias. Outcomes were reported as odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) using the Mantel-Haenszel method. The GRADE classification was used to estimate the certainty of evidence.

Results: A total of 11 studies (1141 patients) comparing EVR vs OSR for arterial AMI were identified and analyzed. The mean patient age was 61.9 to 73.6 years and 45.1% of the patients were male. Compared with OSR, EVR as the first treatment may not decrease short-term mortality (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.50-1.25; P = .31; very low certainty) and second-look laparotomy (OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.30-3.36; P = .99; very low certainty). However, EVR may be associated with decreased bowel resection (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.20-0.88; P = .022; very low certainty) and short bowel syndrome (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.21-0.75; P = .005; very low certainty). The metaregression revealed that the mortality regarding EVR vs OSR was not impacted significantly by thrombotic etiology (-0.002; 95% CI, -0.027 to 0.022; P = .85), whereas it was impacted significantly by publication year (0.076; 95% CI, 0.069-0.145; P = .031).

Conclusions: Compared with OSR, EVR as the first treatment for arterial AMI may not decrease short-term mortality or second-look laparotomy. Future multicenter randomized controlled trials are needed urgently to confirm these results.