Open or percutaneous revascularization for chronic splanchnic syndrome

BackgroundTreatment of chronic splanchnic syndrome remains controversial. In the past 10 years, endovascular repair (ER) has replaced open repair (OR) to some extent. This evidence summary reviews the available evidence for ER or OR of chronic splanchnic syndrome.MethodsA systematic literature search of MEDLINE database was performed to identify all studies that evaluated treatment of chronic splanchnic syndrome between 1988 and 2009.ResultsThe best available evidence consists of prospectively accumulated but retrospectively analyzed data with a high risk for confounding. Only a few of these studies incorporated functional tests to assess splanchnic ischemia before or after treatment. ER has the advantage of low short-term morbidity but the disadvantage of decreased long-term primary patency compared with OR. ER and OR have similar rates of secondary patency, although the reintervention rate after ER is higher.ConclusionER appears to be preferential in the treatment of elderly patients and in patients with comorbidity, severe cachexia, or hostile abdomen. Long-term results after OR are excellent. OR can still be proposed as the preferred option for relatively young and fit patients.