Statements in which the resource exists.
SubjectPredicateObjectContext
pubmed-article:15306948rdf:typepubmed:Citationlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0025474lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:15306948lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0184661lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:15306948lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C1274040lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:15306948lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0231175lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:15306948lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0581603lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:15306948lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0439617lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:issue4lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:dateCreated2004-8-12lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:abstractTextThis report examines results of mesenteric revascularization following a failed splanchnic revascularization. Patients undergoing repeat mesenteric revascularization from January 1985 to July 2002 were identified from a prospectively maintained registry. Data recorded included procedures performed, perioperative mortality, complications, and operative indications. Patients who had embolic events were excluded. Eighty-six patients underwent 105 mesenteric interventions in this time period; 22 patients underwent 33 repeat mesenteric revascularization procedures. There were 25 single-vessel bypasses, 3 multivessel reconstructions, 3 angioplasty procedures (1 open, 2 percutaneous), and 2 graft thrombectomies. Complications occurred in 33.3%. Perioperative mortality was 6.1%, all in patients with acute mesenteric ischemia. One- and 4-year primary patency for repeat mesenteric revascularization was 73.5% and 62.2%, respectively, and survival for repeat mesenteric revascularization was 85.9% and 75.5%, respectively. Patients surgically treated for mesenteric ischemia can require additional interventions. Repeat revascularization effectively prolongs survival when an earlier intervention fails.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:languageenglld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:journalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:citationSubsetIMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:statusMEDLINElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:issn1538-5744lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:authorpubmed-author:TaylorLloyd...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:authorpubmed-author:LandryGregory...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:authorpubmed-author:MonetaGregory...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:authorpubmed-author:GiswoldMary...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:issnTypePrintlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:volume38lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:ownerNLMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:authorsCompleteYlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:pagination315-9lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:15306948...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:15306948...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:15306948...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:15306948...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:15306948...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:15306948...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:15306948...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:15306948...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:15306948...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:15306948...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:15306948...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:15306948...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:15306948...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:15306948...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:15306948...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:15306948...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:15306948...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:15306948...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:15306948...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:articleTitleOutcomes after redo procedures for failed mesenteric revascularization.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:affiliationDivision of Vascular Surgery, Oregon Health and Sciences University, Portland, OR 97201, USA.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:15306948pubmed:publicationTypeJournal Articlelld:pubmed