ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2024
Assessment of arterial supply to the stomach after bariatric surgery using multidetector CT arteriography.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo describe residual arterial supply to the stomach after bariatric surgery via a systematic arterial-phase CT assessment approach that can aid in diagnosis and treatment of postoperative complications and facilitate planning for future procedures.
methodsArterial-phase CT of 46 patients who underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or sleeve gastrectomy (SG) at 3 academic institutions were retrospectively reviewed to assess patency of left gastric artery (LGA), right gastric artery (RGA), gastroepiploic artery (GEA), and left inferior phrenic artery (LIPA) and presence of gastric perforators.
resultsIn 25 RYGB and 21 SG patients, mean diameters were LGA 2.2 ± 0.4 mm, RGA 1.6 ± 0.5 mm, and GEA 1.7 ± 0.4 mm. On RYGB scans, all LGAs, RGAs, and 24/25 (96%) of GEAs were identified. Excellent to good patency was seen in 20/25 (80%) LGAs, 21/25 (84%) RGAs, and 23/24 (96%) GEAs. On SG scans, all LGAs, 18/21 (86%) of RGAs, and 20/21 (95%) GEAs were identified. Excellent to good patency was seen in 17/21 (81%) LGAs, 15/18 (83%) RGAs, and 20/20 (100%) GEAs. In terms of gastric perforators, LGA supply was seen on 23/25 (92%) of RYGB and 17/17 (100%) of SG scans. RGA supply was seen on 13/21 (62%) RYGB and 9/18 (50%) SG scans. GEA supply was seen on 19/23 (83%) RYGB scans. No gastric supply via GEA was seen on SG scans.
conclusionIn this study, arterial supply to the stomach through the LGA was consistently identified in all RYGB and SG cases, indicating an uncomplicated surgical approach with regard to preserving the LGA. Dedicated CT angiography protocol or catheter-directed angiography is recommended for accurate and comprehensive assessment of the gastric blood supply, particularly before surgical re-intervention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38951233What 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.