ReviewCVIR endovascular2026
Predictive value of inferior mesenteric artery size in type 2 endoleak after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair-a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in CVIR endovascular, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundType II endoleak after endovascular aneurysm repair is the most common endoleak type. Identifying pre-operative anatomical features that could signal higher risk will improve surveillance post-procedure. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the association between inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) diameter and type II endoleak.
methodsMEDLINE and EMBASE were searched via OVID (1946/1974 respectively to January 2025), in line with the PRISMA statement, for adult patients undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm with reported pre-operative inferior mesenteric artery diameter and post-operative type II endoleak outcomes. Both retrospective and prospective observational studies were eligible. Meta-analysis via a random-effects model evaluated the pooled mean IMA diameter among patients with type II endoleak and the mean difference in IMA diameter between patients with and without endoleak. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.
resultsTwenty studies met inclusion criteria; ten provided extractable quantitative data for pooling (2176 patients; 532 type II endoleaks). Assessment with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale demonstrated that the studies had scores between 6 and 8 out of 9. The pooled mean inferior mesenteric artery diameter among cases with endoleak was 2.95 mm (95% CI 2.64-3.26 mm; p < 0.01; I
conclusionLarger pre-operative inferior mesenteric artery diameter was associated with an increased likelihood of type II endoleak after endovascular aneurysm repair. However, the clinical relevance of a 0.5 mm difference remains uncertain, particularly in view of potential inter-observer measurement variability. Multicentre randomised controlled trials are needed to define actionable thresholds for treatment, considering confounding factors and clinical significance of the endoleak.
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.