Annals of vascular surgery
July 13, 2026 · via Europe PMC
Radiological and Clinical Outcomes of Transcatheter Thrombolysis via Superior Mesenteric Artery Versus Percutaneous Mechanical Thrombectomy in Patients with Anticoagulation-Refractory Acute Mesenteric Venous Thrombosis.
Li W, Liu B, Feng H.
AI summary — for doctors, generated from the abstract only
In anticoagulation-refractory acute mesenteric venous thrombosis, percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy appeared effective without added safety risk compared with indirect catheter-directed thrombolysis via the SMA.
What was studied
Retrospective single-centre review of 42 consecutive patients with acute MVT treated endovascularly (24 indirect CDT via SMA vs 18 PMT), December 2020-March 2024.
Key findings
- 72.2% of PMT patients also received adjunctive indirect CDT
- Thrombolysis time and urokinase dose were lower in the PMT group (specific statistic not fully captured in the abstract)
- Authors conclude PMT was effective without increasing safety risks
Clinical relevance
This suggests PMT may reduce thrombolytic exposure in refractory MVT, but the small retrospective design means it cannot establish superiority.
Who should care
Limitations
Small retrospective non-randomized study; most PMT patients also received CDT, and detailed outcome statistics were not fully captured in the abstract.
Mechanical thrombectomy is a reasonable option to consider for refractory mesenteric venous thrombosis, pending better data.
This is an AI-generated summary of the published abstract, not a clinical recommendation. It may not reflect the full text or subsequent updates — verify against the original source before acting on it.
Abstract
Background
The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of indirect catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) via the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) and percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy (PMT) for acute mesenteric venous thrombosis (MVT).
Methods
From December 2020 to March 2024, the clinical data of patients with acute MVT who received endovascular therapy were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were stratified by the treatment strategy. The primary outcome measure was technical success, which was assessed by thrombolysis grade. Secondary outcomes were complications, time to resume oral intake, dosage of Urokinase used, postischemia intestinal stenosis, and mortality.
Results
Forty-two consecutive patients were identified. CDT was initiated in 24 patients, and 18 patients received PMT treatment. In PMT group, 13 patients (72.2%) received adjunctive indirect CDT after mechanical thrombectomy. The time of thrombolysis and dosage of Urokinase were both less in the PMT group (P < 0.05). The bowl rest time is less in the PMT group (8 vs. 5 days; P < 0.05). No difference was found in perioperative complications, mortality, and bowel stricture between 2 groups. More patients in the PMT group had better revascularization with lysis grade of III (0% vs. 38.9%, P < 0.05) and fully revascularization (0% vs. 27.8%, P < 0.05).
Conclusion
Compared with indirect CDT via SMA, PMT is an effective treatment for anticoagulation-refractory acute MVT without increasing safety risks.
DOI
10.1016/j.avsg.2026.06.046
PMID
42442535
Research metadata (titles, abstracts, authors, publication dates) is sourced from Europe PMC, which aggregates content from PubMed/MEDLINE, PubMed Central, and other providers under the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM/NCBI). NLM does not claim copyright on abstracts; the original journal publishers or authors may hold rights to the full articles. AI-generated summaries are derived only from the abstract, never the full text, and are always labeled as AI-generated.
Want more like this?
Browse more from the feed. A free account unlocks the full feed, saving and communities.
Back to the research feed