ArticleCureus2026
Our Experience in the Management of Splenic Arterial Thrombosis.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article presents a combined literature overview and a three-case clinical series highlighting the diagnostic complexity and therapeutic decision-making in splenic arterial and venous thrombosis. Although splenic infarction is a rare cause of acute abdominal pain, the article emphasizes its high clinical significance and its association with systemic thromboembolic disease, atrial fibrillation, hematologic disorders, hypercoagulable states, pancreatitis, and splanchnic venous thrombosis. The literature summarized by the authors underscores the modern shift toward non-operative management in hemodynamically stable patients without rupture or infectious complications. Contemporary multicenter data demonstrate a substantial survival benefit from anticoagulation in splenic infarction, without an associated increase in bleeding risk. Conversely, surgery is now reserved for complicated cases, including splenic rupture, abscess formation, or secondary peritonitis. Regarding isolated splenic vein thrombosis, the authors discuss evolving evidence showing high rates of spontaneous or anticoagulation-related recanalization and low rates of variceal bleeding, suggesting that routine splenectomy is no longer indicated except in cases complicated by infection. The article's three clinical cases exemplify these principles. It is concluded that the decisive factor in treatment selection is not the presence of thrombosis alone, but the development of complications, especially abscess, rupture, sepsis, and peritonitis. In uncomplicated cases, anticoagulation remains safe and effective, while surgery should be used selectively for life-threatening sequelae.
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.