TIVS versus Non-TIVS management of limb vascular injury in limb salvage: systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Pub Date : 2025-03-11 DOI:10.1007/s00423-025-03657-0
Dongchao Xiao, Feng Zhu, Sihong Li, Junjie Li, Miaozhong Li, Chenlin Lu, Jiadong Pan, Xin Wang
{"title":"TIVS versus Non-TIVS management of limb vascular injury in limb salvage: systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Dongchao Xiao, Feng Zhu, Sihong Li, Junjie Li, Miaozhong Li, Chenlin Lu, Jiadong Pan, Xin Wang","doi":"10.1007/s00423-025-03657-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To compare the postoperative complications between temporary intravascular shunts (TIVS) and non-TIVS management in limb salvage surgery for severe limb trauma, and to provide reference for clinical decision making.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The literature on postoperative complications of limb salvage with and without TIVS was searched in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase and MEDLINE from January 2000 to December 2023. References were screened and extracted according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, and meta-analysis was performed using RevMan5.4 software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>8 studies were included, including 1375 cases, 329 of which used TIVS and 1046 of which did not. Compared with no TIVS group, TIVS group was associated with a lower rate of amputation (OR = 0.48, 95%CI: [0.29, 0.82], P = 0.007) and less limb ischemic time (SMD = -0.96, 95%CI: [-1.17, -0.74], P < 0.00001), the incidence of thrombosis (OR = 1.48, 95%CI: [0.46, 4.78], P = 0.51), fasciotomy (OR = 0.84, 95%CI: [0.30, 2.36], P = 0.75) and infection (OR = 0.88, 95%CI: [0.35, 2.19], P = 0.78) were not statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Compared with no TIVS group, TIVS group may reduce amputation rate and limb ischemia time, prospective multi-centre studies are needed for further evaluation.</p>","PeriodicalId":17983,"journal":{"name":"Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery","volume":"410 1","pages":"95"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11897073/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-025-03657-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: To compare the postoperative complications between temporary intravascular shunts (TIVS) and non-TIVS management in limb salvage surgery for severe limb trauma, and to provide reference for clinical decision making.

Methods: The literature on postoperative complications of limb salvage with and without TIVS was searched in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase and MEDLINE from January 2000 to December 2023. References were screened and extracted according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, and meta-analysis was performed using RevMan5.4 software.

Results: 8 studies were included, including 1375 cases, 329 of which used TIVS and 1046 of which did not. Compared with no TIVS group, TIVS group was associated with a lower rate of amputation (OR = 0.48, 95%CI: [0.29, 0.82], P = 0.007) and less limb ischemic time (SMD = -0.96, 95%CI: [-1.17, -0.74], P < 0.00001), the incidence of thrombosis (OR = 1.48, 95%CI: [0.46, 4.78], P = 0.51), fasciotomy (OR = 0.84, 95%CI: [0.30, 2.36], P = 0.75) and infection (OR = 0.88, 95%CI: [0.35, 2.19], P = 0.78) were not statistically significant.

Conclusion: Compared with no TIVS group, TIVS group may reduce amputation rate and limb ischemia time, prospective multi-centre studies are needed for further evaluation.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
肢体保留中肢体血管损伤的TIVS与非TIVS管理:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:比较暂时性血管内分流术(暂分流术)与非暂分流术在严重肢体创伤保肢手术中的术后并发症,为临床决策提供参考。方法:检索2000年1月至2023年12月PubMed、Cochrane Library、Embase、MEDLINE等文献,检索有无tis的保肢术后并发症。根据纳入标准和排除标准对文献进行筛选和提取,使用RevMan5.4软件进行meta分析。结果:纳入8项研究,共1375例,其中329例使用TIVS, 1046例未使用TIVS。与无TIVS组相比,TIVS组截肢率更低(OR = 0.48, 95%CI: [0.29, 0.82], P = 0.007),肢体缺血时间更短(SMD = -0.96, 95%CI: [-1.17, -0.74]), P结论:与无TIVS组相比,TIVS组可减少截肢率和肢体缺血时间,有待多中心前瞻性研究进一步评价。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
8.70%
发文量
342
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Langenbeck''s Archives of Surgery aims to publish the best results in the field of clinical surgery and basic surgical research. The main focus is on providing the highest level of clinical research and clinically relevant basic research. The journal, published exclusively in English, will provide an international discussion forum for the controlled results of clinical surgery. The majority of published contributions will be original articles reporting on clinical data from general and visceral surgery, while endocrine surgery will also be covered. Papers on basic surgical principles from the fields of traumatology, vascular and thoracic surgery are also welcome. Evidence-based medicine is an important criterion for the acceptance of papers.
期刊最新文献
Accelerated enhanced recovery after colorectal surgery with early discharge: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Personalized 3D surgical planning in liver transplantation: A new era in preoperative assessment and management of vascular and biliary complications. Is surgery with curative intent feasible in old and very old patients with non-small cell lung cancer? - Experience of a certified lung cancer center over one decade. Minimally invasive management of chronic pleural empyema in non-expandable lung: a systematic review of tunneled pleural catheter use as a surgical alternative. Stereotactic body radiotherapy as a rescue modality for definitive treatment of therapy-refractory fistulas after pancreatic surgery.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1