ReviewCureus2022
Bucket-Handle Mesenteric Tears: A Comprehensive Review of Their Presentation and Management.
Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgically confirmed mesenteric avulsion following blunt abdominal trauma: a contemporary case series.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Delayed small bowel obstruction due to blunt abdominal trauma with mesenteric injury: a case report.Journal of surgical case reports · 2026Article
- Predictive Value of Preoperative CT Findings for Bowel Ischemia in Patients with Blunt Mesenteric Injury: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Rates and risk factors for anastomotic leak following blunt trauma-associated bucket handle intestinal injuries: a multicenter study.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bucket-handle mesenteric tears remain a diagnostic challenge for clinicians. We aim to review the literature, including a single-surgeon series, to better understand their presentation and management. Three electronic databases (Ovid Medline, Embase, and PubMed) were searched for original research articles, describing relevant cases, from database inception to October 2021 using the following Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms: mesenteric avulsion, mesenteric tear, and blunt abdominal trauma. A retrospective review of cases managed under a single surgeon at our unit was also performed. Data extracted included demographics, mechanism of injury, presenting features, diagnostic imaging, surgical management, and patient outcome. In total, 19 studies were identified, including 22 patients (median age 34.5 years). The most common cause of injury was seat-belted road traffic accidents (77.3%), and patients commonly presented with abdominal pain (72.7%), tenderness (50%), positive seat-belt sign (54.5%), and haemodynamic compromise (45.5%). Computerised tomography scanning was the main imaging modality (68%), and the most common findings reported were abdominal free fluid (36.4%) and abdominal wall hernia (27.3%). The majority of patients were operated on within 24 hours of injury (68%), had a median length of stay of 14.5 days, and experienced an uncomplicated recovery (68%). There was no association between the development of complications and delayed surgical intervention >24 hours (p = 0.145). Our institution's experience was similar, with 50% of patients undergoing surgical intervention within 24 hours. The median age was 32.5 years (50% female), and the median length of stay was 11 days. A high index of suspicion, serial monitoring, including blood tests, and imaging, with a low threshold for early repeat imaging, can provide a useful guide for identifying patients with bucket-handle tears.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.