ArticleSurgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA2024
Superior mesenteric artery revisited using magnetic resonance angiography.
Article in Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Magnetic resonance angiography-based assessment of the renal artery and its branching pattern.Anatomical science international · 2026Article
- Changes in Abdominal Artery Diameter in Patients Treated for Acute Aortic Dissection.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to examine the superior mesenteric artery in detail by magnetic resonance angiography to provide an alternative to other imaging methods, to reduce the exposure time of patients and physicians to X-rays and the time spent in catheter angiography, to determine the variations, positions, and locations of the celiac trunk, and to provide detailed information for surgeons and interventional radiologists using this method.
methodsThe procedures were approved by the Kocaeli University Medical School Non-Interventional Clinical Research Ethics Committee (10.04.2023, approval number: 2021/51). MR angiography images of 185 patients with abdominal imaging in PACS (Picture Archiving Communication Systems) were retrospectively registered. The level of origin of the superior mesenteric artery according to the vertebral column, angle of origin, distance between the superior mesenteric artery and branches of the abdominal aorta, and branching pattern of the superior mesenteric artery were evaluated. Parameters were evaluated according to gender and age using SPSS version 25.
resultsThe distance between superior mesenteric artery-inferior mesenteric artery and superior mesenteric artery-aortic bifurcation in males was higher than in females, and the difference was statistically significant. In females and the whole study group, a low, positive and significant relationship was found between age and superior mesenteric artery-sagittal angle. The most common origin site for the superior mesenteric artery, according to the vertebral column was found to be at L1 middle for males and L1 upper for females. The most common superior mesenteric artery branching pattern was classical type in both genders.
conclusionIndividual evaluation of the superior mesenteric artery could reduce the risks during surgical interventions, considering the relationship of the superior mesenteric artery, especially with distally located vessels, and the gender differences for the angle of origin. Furthermore, considering that interventional radiologists choose the catheter according to the angle of origin of the artery during catheter angiography procedures, individual evaluation of patients taking into account gender and age is of utmost importance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38376526What 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.