A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Reported Success and Complication Outcomes the Management of Acute Upper Limb Ischaemia.

Lee, 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 Ischaemia. Annals of Vascular Surgery. ISSN 0890-5096

Preview

PDF (1-s2.0-S0890509626005716-main) - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

Objectives: Acute upper limb ischaemia (AULI) is a surgical emergency whereby the upper limb blood supply is threatened, leading to a risk to a risk of limb loss, functional disability, or life-threatening complications. A variety of strategies for management exist 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 GRADE methodology. Random-effects proportional meta-analysis was performed using Stata. Results: Twenty-seven studies (3162 patients) were included, with no randomised controlled trials identified. Reported overall success rates were 90.1% (95%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 (I2>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 standardised 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 multicentre studies and randomised 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:	http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/425752...
Depositing User:	LivePure Connector
Date Deposited:	20 Aug 2026 15:13
Last Modified:	20 Aug 2026 15:13
URI:	https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/104281
DOI:	10.1016/j.avsg.2026.07.055

Downloads

Actions (login required)

View Item