Tools
ToolsLee, Angela D., Iossifidis, Eftichia, Harding, Chloe, Murali, Navanith, Borucki, Joseph, El-Sayed, Tamer, Ali, Tariq, Nandhra, Sandip and Stather, Philip W. (2026) A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Reported Success and Complication Outcomes the Management of Acute Upper Limb Ischemia. Annals of Vascular Surgery, 133. pp. 510-522. ISSN 0890-5096
Preview |
PDF (1-s2.0-S0890509626005716-main)
- Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (1MB) | Preview |
Abstract
Background Acute upper limb ischemia (AULI) is a surgical emergency whereby the upper limb blood supply is threatened, leading to a risk of limb loss, functional disability, or life-threatening complications. A variety of strategies for management exists and include, anticoagulation (termed medical management), open surgery, and endovascular techniques. There are no clear guidelines on how AULI should be managed safely. This review aimed to explore the current strategies of AULI and their associated outcomes. Methods A systematic review was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines and registered prospectively in PROSPERO (CRD420251005180). MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL were searched from inception to September 2025. Observational studies reporting outcomes following surgical, endovascular or medical management of AULI were included. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I and certainty of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Random-effects proportional meta-analysis was performed using Stata. Results Twenty-seven studies (3,162 patients) were included, with no randomized controlled trials identified. Reported overall success rates were 90.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 84.5–94.7%) for surgical management, 71.8% (95% CI: 41.1–94.9%) for endovascular management and 79.4% (95% CI: 52.6–97.8%) for medical management. Substantial heterogeneity was observed across all treatment groups (I 2>87%). Reported complication and reintervention rates varied widely across studies. All 27 studies were assessed as having a high risk of bias, mainly due to lack of adjustment for confounding factors and incomplete baseline severity reporting. Certainty of evidence was low to very low. Conclusion The current evidence describing outcomes following AULI management is limited, heterogeneous and predominantly derived from retrospective observational studies that lacked standardized outcome definitions and long-term functional follow-up data. Due to confounding by indication and lack of direct comparisons, reliable conclusions regarding relative effectiveness between treatment strategies cannot be made. Prospective multicenter studies and randomized trials are required.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Faculty \ School: | Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Norwich Medical School |
| UEA Research Groups: | Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Research Centres > Metabolic Health |
| Related URLs: | |
| Depositing User: | LivePure Connector |
| Date Deposited: | 20 Aug 2026 15:13 |
| Last Modified: | 10 Sep 2026 11:13 |
| URI: | https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/104281 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.avsg.2026.07.055 |
Downloads
Downloads per month over past year
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |