An observational study in Acute Mesenteric Ischemia, sponsored by University of Tartu. Completed at 1 site in Estonia. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-11-06.
Sponsored by University of Tartu · Observational
Computed tomography (CT) is the standard modality for scanning patients with critical acute abdominal conditions, including suspected acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI). CT imaging can potentially differentiate between reversible and irreversible ischaemic damage of the bowel. This moment is pivotal in selecting the treatment strategy for AMI - in the absence of irreversible damage; reperfusion therapy can preserve intestinal viability, thereby avoiding the need for bowel resection. The present study tests the hypothesis that combining several symptoms may enhance the diagnostic performance of CT scanning in detecting salvageable bowel in patients with AMI. This study is an ancillary component of the AMESI study (Clinical Trials: NCT05218863) - a prospective, multicentre observational study aimed at identifying the incidence and describing the outcomes of acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI) in adult hospitalized patients. The ultimate purpose of the present study is to create a computed tomography-based radiological score for the assessment of bowel viability in patients with AMI.
40 studies on the registry are indexed under Mesenteric Ischemia; 14 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 157 is close to the median of 154 across 26 observational studies indexed under Mesenteric Ischemia.
Browse Mesenteric Ischemia studies →University of Tartu is the lead sponsor of 46 studies on the registry; 13 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
This is a substudy of the AMESI study - "Incidence, Diagnosis, Management, and Outcome of Acute Mesenteric Ischaemia: A Prospective, Multicentre Observational Study." (Clinical Trials: NCT05218863) As of the end of August 2023, a total of 705 patients from 32 study sites worldwide have been enrolled, with 418 of them having confirmed cases of AMI. For patients with confirmed AMI, comprehensive data collection concerning diagnostics, management, and long-term outcomes has been completed
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Patients included in the AMESI study as suspected AMI
Patients included in the AMESI study with confirmed AMI, who did not undergo bowel resection Patients with one of the following: 1. treated endovascularly and did not undergo bowel resection secondarily 2. received surgical revascularization without bowel resection (initial or secondary) 3. received explorative laparoscopy or laparotomy without the need for bowel resection (initially or secondarily) 4. received conservative treatment without the need for secondary bowel resection
Patients included in the AMESI study with confirmed AMI who (one of the following): 1. underwent bowel resection initially 2. underwent bowel resection secondarily 3. did not undergo bowel resection because non-salvageable bowel 4. were changed to palliation due to the progression of ischaemia after any initial treatment with curative intention (including endovascular and conservative)
Frequency rate
Frequency rate of common radiological signs in AMI patients with and without salvageable bowel.
Time frame: up to one month
Performance of the radiological score
Performance of the radiological score in patients with different types of AMI.
Time frame: up to one month
Plan to share: Undecided
From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
This study is completed, as verified in Nov 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
University of Tartu