Management of Spontaneous Isolated Mesenteric Artery Dissection: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Background and Aims:

There are increasing reports on case series on spontaneous isolated mesenteric artery dissection, that is, dissections of the superior mesenteric artery and celiac artery, mainly due to improved diagnostic capacity of high-resolution computed tomography angiography performed around the clock. A few case–control studies are now available, while randomized controlled trials are awaited.

Material and Methods:

The present systematic review based on 97 original studies offers a comprehensive overview on risk factors, management, conservative therapy, morphological modeling of dissection, and prognosis.

Results and Conclusions:

Male gender, hypertension, and smoking are risk factors for isolated mesenteric artery dissection, while the frequency of diabetes mellitus is reported to be low. Large aortomesenteric angle has also been considered to be a factor for superior mesenteric artery dissection. The overwhelming majority of patients can be conservatively treated without the need of endovascular or open operations. Conservative therapy consists of blood pressure lowering therapy, analgesics, and initial bowel rest, whereas there is no support for antithrombotic agents. Complete remodeling of the dissection after conservative therapy was found in 43% at mid-term follow-up. One absolute indication for surgery and endovascular stenting of the superior mesenteric artery is development of peritonitis due to bowel infarction, which occurs in 2.1% of superior mesenteric artery dissections and none in celiac artery dissections. The most documented end-organ infarction in celiac artery dissections is splenic infarctions, which occurs in 11.2%, and is a condition that should be treated conservatively. The frequency of ruptured pseudoaneurysm in the superior mesenteric artery and celiac artery dissection is very rare, 0.4%, and none of these patients were in shock at presentation. Endovascular therapy with covered stents should be considered in these patients.

Keywords

Arterial dissection mesenteric artery dissection mesenteric ischemia computed tomography conservative therapy pseudoaneurysm

Introduction

Spontaneous isolated dissection of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) and the celiac artery (CA) are labeled as isolated mesenteric artery dissections (IMADs). IMADs are increasingly recognized due to widely available high-quality computed tomography angiography (CTA) examination around the clock. For proper diagnosis, imaging has to be performed with intravenous contrast and image acquisition in the arterial phase (Fig. 1). Most patients are diagnosed due to acute abdominal pain at the emergency department. Increased resolution of CTA images has also made it possible to diagnose a percentage of patients with asymptomatic IMAD. Because of the rarity of the diagnosis, high-level evidence is lacking and optimal management and follow-up strategies remain uncertain.

Fig. 1.

CTA series in the coronal plane of a 48-year-old male patient with symptomatic SMA dissection. He had a history of hypertension and smoking. Onset of acute abdominal pain in his home country. CTA showed suspicion of occlusion of SMA. Explorative laparotomy with lower midline incision found normal small bowels. Appendectomy was performed. He recovered, became rapidly asymptomatic and was prescribed warfarin. Image at presentation (left): there is an entry of dissection 35 mm from the origin of aorta. The length of the dissection is 65 mm and engages the middle and distal SMA. The false lumen is circulated (between arrows). There is a short occlusion of 5 mm distal in the SMA (between dashed arrows). It is a Type III dissection according to Yun et al. (1) (schematic drawing at the lower right corner). Image 7 years later (middle): partial thrombosis of false lumen (between arrows) and progress to 26 mm long thrombotic occlusion of the distal SMA (between dashed arrows). The maximal diameter of the pseudoaneurysm had increased from 11 mm to 16 mm. Image at 10 years of follow-up (right): There is now total occlusion of the main stem of the SMA along the length of the dissection (between dashed arrows). The patient was asymptomatic. The patient died 7 months after this last CT follow-up due to advanced malignancy.

The aim of this systematic review in patients with IMAD is to evaluate risk factors, management, mode of conservative therapy, complete radiological remodeling after conservative therapy, and outcome.

Methods

A systematic literature search strategy of articles on IMAD published from 1 January 1995 to 17 February 2020 was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases, for relevant articles published in English. The search was performed with the help of an information specialist and a clinical librarian. In all, 2605 unique abstracts were retrieved after deduplication. The detailed literature search is outlined in Supplemental Appendix, Table 1. Selection of the literature was based on information provided in the title and abstract of the retrieved studies. Only peer-reviewed published literature and studies presenting predefined outcomes were considered. Single case reports with less than five patients, abstracts only, experimental studies and in vitro studies were excluded. Systematic reviews (n = 8), mainly diagnostic studies (n = 6), manuscript in Chinese (n = 14) or Japanese (n = 1) language, protocol for a randomized control study (n = 1) and study on mesenteric and renal dissections without reporting separately for each type of dissection (n = 1) were excluded. If duplication (n = 5) from the same cohort were identified, the latest version was included. Original reports or reports from multi-center collaborations were included. Ninety-seven studies (1 –97) were extracted by one author (SA) for this systematic review (Fig. 2). These studies originated from China (n = 31), Korea (n = 24), Japan (n = 21), the United States (n = 13), France (n = 4), Taiwan (n = 1), Brazil (n = 1), and Israel (n = 1). In the study with the largest sample size from the United States (53), 2 out of 77 (2.6%) patients with IMAD were of Asian ethnicity. There was one international multicentre study (the United States, Japan, the Netherlands, France). Ten or more annual original reports were published in the years 2019 (n = 14), 2018 (n = 14), 2017 (n = 12), and 2010 (n = 10).

Fig. 2.

Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) flow chart for the review on spontaneous isolated mesenteric artery dissections (IMADs).

Data quality was assessed by the European Society of Cardiology system (99): Level of evidence A reflects data derived from multiple clinical trials or meta-analyses; B reflects data derived from a single randomized clinical trial or large non-randomized studies; C consensus of opinion of the experts and/or small studies, retrospective studies, and registries.

Statistics

Data pooling was performed when feasible from the dataset. Proportions were expressed in percentage with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Normal distributed variables were expressed as mean with standard deviation (SD). Skewed distributions were expressed as median with interquartile range (IQR). Correlation between two continuous variables was calculated with Pearson correlation.

Results

Patients

Ninety-seven studies (evidence level C) with 4239 patients with IMAD were identified. Mean age was 54 years (SD 4.1) in 96 reporting studies. Symptomatic and asymptomatic patients were found in 81% and 19%, respectively, in 93 reporting studies. There were 3408 (80.4%) SMA dissections, 759 (17.9%) CA dissections, 68 concomitant SMA and CA dissections (1.6%), and 4 (0.1%) inferior mesenteric artery dissections.

Risk Factors

Male gender (88%), hypertension (44%), and smoking (42%) were the most prevalent risk factors for IMAD. Diabetes mellitus was found in a low percentage, 7%, of the patients (Table 1).

Table 1

Pooled estimates of risk factors in 4239 patients in 97 studies with IMAD (1 –97).

Variable	Studies reporting (N)	Proportion (%)	95% CI (%)
Male gender	95	88	87–89
Hypertension	85	44	43–46
Smoking	71	41	40–43
Diabetes mellitus	58	7	6–8
Hyperlipidemia	49	17	16–19
Cardiac disease, any	30	8	6–10

IMAD: isolated mesenteric artery dissection; CI: confidence interval.

Morphological Classification of Dissection Based On Ct

An anatomical classification system for describing the extent and severity of the dissection was reported in 52 (53%) studies. The two most common were the Sakamoto (20/52; 38%) and Yun classification (10/52; 19%).

Potentially Life-Threatening Disease-Related Complications

Ruptured pseudoaneurysm in CA were found in 10 patients in 38 eligible studies and ruptured pseudoaneurysm in SMA in 7 patients in 87 eligible studies. The reported frequency of ruptured pseudoaneurysm was 0.4% (17/4239) among the study patients. None of these patients were in circulatory shock at presentation. Four patients were reported to have been treated conservatively with success. There were 46 (11.2%) splenic infarctions among 412 CA dissections in 11 studies documenting the presence of splenic infarction(s). One splenectomy was performed. All 43 bowel resections were performed in SMA dissections, and the bowel resection rate was 2.1% (43/2092) in 56 studies reporting on SMA dissections only. No bowel resection was reported in studies on CA dissections only.

Management of Patients

Eighty-two percent of the 4239 patients were treated conservatively. Endovascular procedures were performed in 657 patients: stenting/stent-grafting of true lumen (n = 540), (coil) embolization of false lumen/aneurysm (n = 101), catheter-directed local thrombolysis (n = 18), percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (n = 7), catheter-directed local papaverine infusion at 30 mg/h (n = 4), and in one case the endovascular intervention was unspecified. The sum exceeds 657 since more than one endovascular procedure was performed in the same patient in some cases. Open vascular surgical procedures were performed in 98 patients: bypass from the aorta or iliac segment to the CA or SMA (n = 45) using prosthetic (n = 6), vein (n = 8) or unspecified conduit (n = 31), patch angioplasty (n = 24), thrombectomy (n = 12), interposition graft (n = 8), surgical fenestration (n = 2), resection of dissection and reimplantation of artery (n = 2), aneurysmorrhaphy (n = 2), resection of dissection and direct arterial end-to-end anastomosis (n = 1), resection of dissection and bowel resection (n = 1), and in three cases the surgical repair was unspecified. Some patients underwent multiple arterial surgical reconstructions. Bowel resection was performed in 1.0% (43/4239) of all patients with IMAD (Table 2). The proportion of symptomatic (78.3%; 2374/3031) and asymptomatic (21.7%; 657/3031) patients were reported in 93 (96%) studies.

Table 2

Management of 4239 patients in 97 studies with IMAD (1 –97).

Variable	Studies reporting (N)	Proportion (%)	95% CI (%)
Conservative	97	82	80–83
Endovascular therapy	97	16	14–17
Open vascular surgery	96	2.3	1.9–2.8
Bowel resection	95	1.0	0.8–1.4

IMAD: isolated mesenteric artery dissection; CI: confidence interval.

Conservative Management

There were 352 patients in 15 studies reporting on conservative therapy exclusively. The proportion of symptomatic and asymptomatic patients in these 15 studies were 83.2% (293/352) and 16.8% (59/352), respectively. No antithrombotic or anticoagulation therapy was given to 72% of the patients in these 15 studies (Table 3). Among these 15 studies, four reported on symptomatic patients only, and 50% (37/74) received no antithrombotic or anticoagulation therapy.

Table 3

Management of 352 patients in 15 studies on IMAD reporting on conservative therapy only (7, 10, 23, 24, 25, 30, 33, 35, 37, 40, 57, 62, 63, 81, 93).

Variable	Studies reporting (N)	Proportion (%)	95% CI (%)
Initial heparin or LMWH	14	18	14–22
Antithrombotic	14	22	18–26
Peroral anticoagulation (warfarin)	12	4	3–7
No antithrombotic or anticoagulation therapy	14	72	68–77

IMAD: isolated mesenteric artery dissection; CI: confidence interval; LMWH: low-molecular-weight heparin.

Complete Remodeling of Dissection

Complete remodeling (morphological restitution of the artery to its normal condition) at CT follow-up at median time of 22 months (IQR: 13–31) was found in 43% (95% CI: 43–47) of 593 patients in 20 (7, 20, 22, 25, 33, 34, 37, 44, 58, 63, 65, 69, 71, 77, 78, 80, 81, 85, 88, 89) studies on symptomatic IMAD treated conservatively.

Late Intervention

There were 13 late endovascular (5, 11, 13, 16, 43, 63, 68, 88, 90, 96) and eight open (4, 13, 43, 47, 67, 90, 95) vascular procedures at follow-up (range 1–44 months) reported in 15 studies. The indications for late interventions were occlusive arterial disease (n = 6) and post-dissection aneurysm (n = 9). The indication for late intervention was unspecified in six procedures. The occlusive disease was treated by endovascular stenting due to restenosis after previous stenting (n = 1) and operated plasty (n = 2), and by open surgical bypass (n = 1), thrombectomy plus thrombolysis (n = 1), and thrombectomy plus bowel resection (n = 1). The post-dissection aneurysm was treated by endovascular coil embolization of the false lumen with (n = 4) or without stenting (n = 1), Onyx^® embolization of the false lumen (n = 1), and by open resection of aneurysm, aorto-hepatic bypass plus reimplantation of the splenic artery (n = 1) and resection of intima flap plus vein angioplasty (n = 2).

Mortality

Mortality from IMAD was estimated to be 0.5% or 21 deaths in 3885 patients reported from 93 studies. The number of deaths was correlated to the number of bowel resections performed (r = 0.89; p < 0.001). In one report (13), one stent-associated reduction of intestinal perfusion occurred, resulting in intestinal necrosis and death.

Discussion

The majority of case series stems from East Asian countries. The reason may be multiple. Japan has the largest number of CT scanners among all countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (100). South Korea allows CT as part of a general medical check-up (101). China has a large population and most reports of isolated SMA dissection comes from developed regions with high population density (102) and better access to CT scanning. Nevertheless, incidence of CT-verified symptomatic Korean patients with IMAD admitted to the emergency department with abdominal pain was reported to be 0.96%, significantly higher, compared to 0.03% in a comparative Caucasian population (101).

The relation between symptomatic and asymptomatic cases is greatly influenced on methods of retrieval of case series. Series collected by CTA findings from a radiological information system, and not on in-hospital clinical diagnosis based on international classification of diseases codes, will have a larger proportion of asymptomatic cases, which might be chosen to be excluded (20) from the study cohort or not (23). Endovascular therapy has developed and numerous published reports on technical approaches and outcomes exist, frequently excluding patients who were treated conservatively (15). This may result in publication bias toward higher reporting of intervention cases.

The present review confirms that male gender is a risk factor for IMAD. The results also suggest that hypertension and smoking are risk factors, which has been supported by a well-designed case–control study, where symptomatic SMA dissections and controls were matched by clinical presentation, age, gender, and body mass index (84). In addition, increased angulation between the SMA and the distal aorta (> 70°), was found to be associated with symptomatic SMA dissection (84). Large aortomesenteric angle was considered to be an important etiological factor for SMA dissection in another case–control study, which also found that Korean individuals had a larger aortomesenteric angle than Caucasians (101). The low frequency of diabetes mellitus in the present review is unclear. To put these data into perspective, interpretation of data from studies on aortic dissection, a disease with similar patient characteristics and location of primary entry of the dissection on the greater curvature, can be useful. In a nationwide case–control study, individuals with diabetes mellitus had a reduced long-term risk of aortic dissection compared to individuals with no diabetes (103). The reason behind this finding is speculative, but may suggest that glycated cross-links in arterial wall tissue may protect toward arterial dissection.

Emergency CTA has its primary role in the diagnosis of IMAD and evaluation of secondary intestinal ischemic lesions at risk for bowel resection. There is no proof that the morphological classification systems of the dissections described by Sakamoto or Yun dictates clinical decision-making. When there is a clinical indication to operate, CTA-reconstructed images of the dissection may be useful in guiding mode of intestinal revascularization, endovascular, or open vascular surgery. Intestinal revascularization should preferably be performed prior to any bowel resection at the hybrid operation room (104). However, the overwhelmingly majority of patients in the present review were treated conservatively without the need of endovascular or open operations. In fact, there appears to be very few indications for intervention in IMAD patients. One indication is development of peritonitis due to bowel infarction, which on the other hand, will develop in a very small percentage. The need for bowel resection was very low at only 1.0%, and was only necessary in SMA dissections, whereas there were no bowel resections performed in CA dissections. The present review showed clearly that the need for bowel resection was correlated to death in IMAD. The most-documented end-organ infarction in CA dissections was splenic infarction, a condition that should be treated conservatively (23, 54, 56). The frequency of ruptured pseudoaneurysm in SMA and CA dissections was rare. This apparently life-threatening condition was never associated with shock in the reported cases and four patients with ruptured CA dissections (23, 37) out of the 17 documented cases were even treated conservatively without operation. Hence, ruptured pseudoaneurysm as a complication to IMAD based on a CTA finding but not with clinical signs of bleeding may potentially be treated conservatively under strict vigilance. On the contrary, since none of the 97 studies in the review reported patients diagnosed at autopsy, ex-hospital deaths due to intra-abdominal exsanguination cannot be excluded.

Pursuing the endovascular treatment option may cause harm. In an honest and courageous report, there were endovascular technical failures in a large proportion of patients (13), including failure of cannulation of the true lumina, stent thrombosis, and stent misplacements into false lumen. Most importantly, one stent-associated reduction of intestinal perfusion occurred, resulting in intestinal necrosis and death. All five patients undergoing failed endovascular attempts without having a stent placed in the SMA had uneventful outcomes after subsequent conservative therapy, which suggests that there was no indication of endovascular therapy in the first place. The often-stated indications for stenting such as large dissecting aneurysm and/or persistence or aggravation of symptoms (105) during a short period of time, remain speculative and are not supported by current evidence. The CTA features of the large dissecting aneurysm seen at various time points in the case presented in Fig. 1 was indeed worrisome, but no endovascular surgeon at our highly endovascular-oriented center was throughout the long follow-up time interested in planning for a endovascular stent graft procedure covering numerous important arterial branches of the SMA potentially resulting in life-threatening intestinal ischemia in this asymptomatic patient.

The mode of conservative therapy generally consisted of blood pressure lowering therapy, analgesics, and initial bowel rest. However, the need and type of antithrombotic therapy in these patients has been a matter of debate. The majority of patients, 74%, in this review were not treated with any specific antithrombotic or anticoagulation therapy. Since IMAD is not an atherosclerotic disease (106), there is no evidence of beneficial effect of antithrombotic therapy (107). A recent meta-analysis did not recommend the use of additional antithrombotic agents for either symptomatic or asymptomatic SMA dissection, unless further evidence shows any beneficial effect (108).

Endovascular therapy with stenting is inherently associated with increased proportion of complete remodeling of the dissection compared to conservative therapy (65). However, stented patients may need life-long antiplatelet agent to prevent stent thrombosis (65), and some patients will inevitably develop in-stent restenosis (21). Instead, conservative management of IMAD without any antithrombotic medication is a fairly good option, since the chances of complete remodeling after conservative therapy was 43% after a median CTA follow-up time of 22 months in the present review. In addition, late interventions were rarely performed, only 21 documented late interventions in a total of 4239 patients. However, long-term follow-up is generally not reported and late aneurysmal degeneration with or without mesenteric artery occlusion may develop. On the contrary, morphologic changes of the IMAD appears mainly to occur within the first year after onset of disease (25), and serial CT follow-up thereafter does not seem to be appropriate due to harmful exposure of cumulative radiation and iodine contrast to these middle-aged individuals. If imaging follow-up is considered in selected patients, the combination of color duplex ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound may be a viable and preferred alternative for surveillance (83). In asymptomatic IMAD patients, however, it is very uncertain whether imaging follow-up should be performed at all.

In summary, there are now numerous case series on IMAD with focus on risk factors, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis. While some retrospective case–control studies (41, 84, 101) have been published lately, more prospective studies with high-quality data and randomized trials in this area are awaited.

Conclusion

Conservative management is the main treatment option in IMAD patients. There is almost never an indication for stenting in CA dissection. The only absolute indication for endovascular or open vascular surgery is development of severe intestinal ischemia and peritonitis in symptomatic SMA dissection. There is no evidence to support the use of antithrombotic therapy for IMAD patients, unless they have undergone stenting.

Supplemental Material

sj-pdf-1-sjs-10.1177_14574969211000546 – Supplemental material for Management of Spontaneous Isolated Mesenteric Artery Dissection: A Systematic Review

Supplemental material, sj-pdf-1-sjs-10.1177_14574969211000546 for Management of Spontaneous Isolated Mesenteric Artery Dissection: A Systematic Review by S. Acosta and F. B. Gonçalves in Scandinavian Journal of Surgery

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

Matthias Bank, Library & Information, Communication and technology, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Lund University, Lund, Sweden, assisted in the literature search.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Stefan Acosta

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Yun

Kim

Park

, et al: Clinical and angiographic follow-up of spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2009;37(5):572–577.

Ahn

Cho

Mun

, et al: Treatment results for spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection according to our previous guidelines and collective literature review. Ann Vasc Surg 2014;28:1595–1601.

Alcantara

Yang

Sasson

, et al: The evidence for nonoperative management of visceral artery dissections: A single-center experience. Ann Vasc Surg 2015;29(1):103–108.

Amabile

Ouaïssi

Cohen

, et al: Conservative treatment of spontaneous and isolated dissection of mesenteric arteries. Ann Vasc Surg 2009;23(6):738–744.

Chen

Zhang

Pan

, et al: Clinical features and therapeutic options for isolated visceral artery dissection. Ann Vasc Surg 2016;30:227–235.

Cho

Lee

Choi

, et al: Treatment guidelines for isolated dissection of the superior mesenteric artery based on follow-up CT findings. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2011;41:780–785.

Cho

Kim

, et al: Conservative management of symptomatic spontaneous isolated dissection of the superior mesenteric artery. Br J Surg 2009;96:720–723.

Choi

Kwon

: Approaches to the management of spontaneous isolated visceral artery dissection. Ann Vasc Surg 2013;27(6):750–757.

Chu

Hsu

Chen

, et al: Endovascular repair of spontaneous isolated dissection of the superior mesenteric artery. Clin Radiol 2012;67:32–37.

10.

D’Ambrosio

Friedman

Siegel

, et al: Spontaneous isolated dissection of the celiac artery: CT findings in adults. Am J Roentgenol 2007;188(6):W506–W511.

11.

De Carlo

Ganguli

Borges

, et al: Presentation, treatment, and outcomes in patients with spontaneous isolated and superior mesenteric artery dissection. Vasc Med 2017;22:505–511.

12.

DiMusto

Oberdoerster

Criado

: Isolated celiac artery dissection. J Vasc Surg 2015;61:972–976.

13.

Dong

Ning

, et al: Failures and lessons in the endovascular treatment of symptomatic isolated dissection of the superior mesenteric artery. Ann Vasc Surg 2016;31:152–162.

14.

Dou

Tang

Zheng

, et al: Isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection: CTA features and clinical relevance. Abd Radiol 2020;45:2879–2885.

15.

Cao

Shi

, et al: Endovascular bare stenting for isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection. Vasc Endovascular Surg 2020;54(1):12–16.

16.

Galastri

Cavalcante

Motta-Leal-Filho

, et al: Evaluation and management of symptomatic isolated spontaneous celiac trunk dissection. Vasc Med 2015;20:358–363.

17.

Garrett

: Options for treatment of spontaneous mesenteric artery dissection. J Vasc Surg 2014;59:1433–1439.

18.

Glehen

Feugier

Aleksic

, et al: Spontaneous dissection of the celiac artery. Ann Vasc Surg 2001;15:687–692.

19.

Gobble

Brill

Rockman

, et al: Endovascular treatment of spontaneous isolated dissections of the superior mesenteric artery. J Vasc Surg 2009;50:1326–1332.

20.

Han

Cho

, et al: Clinical outcomes of anticoagulation therapy in patients with symptomatic spontaneous isolated dissection of the superior mesenteric artery. Medicine 2016;95(16):e3480.

21.

Hang

Chen

, et al: Distal edge stenosis after stent placement for isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection: Mechanisms and risk factor analysis. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2019;42:1095–1101.

22.

Heo

Kim

Woo

, et al: Treatment strategy based on the natural course for patients with spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection. J Vasc Surg 2017;65(4):1142–1151.

23.

Hosaka

Nemoto

Miyata

: Outcomes of conservative management of spontaneous celiac artery dissection. J Vasc Surg 2017;65(3):760–765.

24.

Ichiba

Hara

Yunoki

, et al: Impact of noninvasive conservative medical treatment for symptomatic isolated celiac artery dissection. Circ J 2016;80:1445–1451.

25.

Ichiba

Hara

Yunoki

, et al: Serial follow-up evaluation with computed tomography after conservative medical treatment in patients with symptomatic spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection. Vasc Endovascular Surg 2017;51(8):538–544.

26.

Jang

Cho

Ahn

, et al: Optimal treatment strategy and natural history of isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection based on long-term follow-up CT findings. Ann Vasc Surg 2020;63:179–185.

27.

Jeong

Kwon

Kim

, et al: Clinical outcomes of conservative treatment in patients with symptomatic isolated spontaneous renal artery dissection and comparison with superior mesenteric artery dissection. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2018;56(2):291–297.

28.

Jia

Zhao

Tian

, et al: Initial and middle-term results of treatment for symptomatic spontaneous isolated dissection of superior mesenteric artery. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2013;45(5):502–508.

29.

Jia

Chen

, et al: Factors associated with failed conservative management in symptomatic isolated mesenteric artery dissection. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2019;58(3):393–399.

30.

Jibiki

Inoue

Kudo

: Conservative treatment for isolated superior mesenteric dissection. Surg Today 2013;43:260–263.

31.

Jung

Lee

Park

, et al: Spontaneous dissection of the splanchnic arteries: CT findings, treatment, and outcome. Am J Roentgenol 2013;200(1):219–225.

32.

Kang

Park

Yoon

, et al: Mid-to long-term outcomes in management of spontaneous isolated coeliac artery dissection (SICAD). Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2020;59:247–253.

33.

Kim

Lee

Kwak

, et al: Natural course and outcomes of spontaneous isolated celiac artery dissection according to morphological findings on computed tomography angiography: STROBE compliant article. Medicine 2018;97(5):e9705.

34.

Kim

Park

, et al: Outcomes of spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection without antithrombotic use. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2018;55(1):132–137.

35.

Kim

H-Y

Jung

Cho

, et al: Clinical and radiologic course of symptomatic spontaneous isolated dissection of the superior mesenteric artery treated with conservative management. J Vasc Surg 2014;59(2):465–472.

36.

Kim

Yoon

Seong

, et al: Spontaneous dissection of superior mesenteric artery long-term outcome of stent placement. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2017;28(12):1722–1726.

37.

Kim

Park

Choi

, et al: Natural history of spontaneous isolated celiac artery dissection after conservative treatment. J Vasc Surg 2018;68(1):55–63.

38.

Kimura

Kato

Nagao

, et al: Outcomes and radiographic findings of isolated spontaneous superior mesenteric artery dissection. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2017;53(2):276–281.

39.

Hye

Frankel

: Management of spontaneous isolated visceral artery dissection. Ann Vasc Surg 2015;29:470–474.

40.

Kwon

Han

Lee

: Conservative management of spontaneous isolated dissection of the superior mesenteric artery. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2017;2017:9623039.

41.

Landry

Yarmosh

Liem

, et al: Nonatherosclerotic vascular causes of acute abdominal pain. Am J Surg 2018;215:838–841.

42.

Q-S

Zhou

, et al: Endovascular stent placement for treatment of spontaneous isolated dissection of the superior mesenteric artery. Ann Vasc Surg 2014;28:445–451.

43.

D-L

Y-Y

Alkalei

, et al: Management strategy for spontaneous isolated dissection of the superior mesenteric artery based on morphologic classification. J Vasc Surg 2014;59:165–172.

44.

Cheng

, et al: Effectiveness of the conservative therapy for symptomatic isolated celiac artery dissection. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2017;40(7):994–1002.

45.

Ding

Shan

, et al: Initial and middle-term outcome of treatment for spontaneous isolated dissection of superior mesenteric artery. Medicine 2015;94(45):e2058.

46.

Liu

Chu

Fan

, et al: Endovascular stent placement for isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection with intestinal ischaemia. Vasa 2019;48(1):73–78.

47.

Loeffler

Obara

Fujimura

, et al: Medical therapy and intervention do not improve uncomplicated isolated mesenteric artery dissection outcomes over observation alone. J Vasc Surg 2017;66:202–208.

48.

Lü

P-H

Zhang

X-C

Wang

L-F

, et al: Percutaneous endovascular reconstruction with bare stent implantation for isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection. Vasc Endovascular Surg 2014;48(5–6):406–411.

49.

Luan

, et al: Vasodilator and endovascular therapy for isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection. J Vasc Surg 2013;57(6):1612–1620.

50.

Min

S-I

Yoon

K-C

Min

S-K

, et al: Current strategy for the treatment of symptomatic isolated dissection of superior mesenteric artery. J Vasc Surg 2011;54:461–466.

51.

Mizuno

Iguchi

Sawada

, et al: Real clinical management of patients with isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection in Japan. J Cardiol 2018;71(2):155–158.

52.

Mkangala

Liang

Dong

, et al: Diagnostic imaging findings and endovascular treatment of patients presented with abdominal pain caused by spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection. Iran J Radiol 2020;17:e93321.

53.

Morgan

Mansukhani

Eskandari

, et al: Ten-year review of isolated spontaneous mesenteric arterial dissections. J Vasc Surg 2018;67(4):1134–1142.

54.

Naganuma

Matsui

Fushimi

, et al: Clinical features of isolated dissections of abdominal aortic branches. Heart Vessels 2016;31(6):1006–1009.

55.

Nonami

Nakanishi

Tanizaki

, et al: Characteristics and diagnostic pitfalls of spontaneous visceral artery dissection in the emergency department. Am J Emerg Med 2016;34(6):1092–1096.

56.

Cho

Kim

, et al: Symptomatic spontaneous celiac artery dissection treated by conservative management: Serial imaging findings. Abdom Imaging 2011;36(1):79–82.

57.

Okamura

Morizumi

Kawata

, et al: Conservative therapy as a primary treatment for spontaneous isolated dissection of the superior mesenteric artery. Ann Vasc Surg 2014;28(8):1939–1945.

58.

Otsuka

Sato

Aoki

, et al: Optimal management strategy for spontaneous isolated dissection of a visceral artery. Vascular 2018;26(2):169–174.

59.

, et al: A modified endovascular technique for treating spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection and the early to medium-term outcomes. Heliyon 2019;5(3):e01354.

60.

Paik

Choi

J-H

Seo

, et al: Clinical usefulness with the combination of color Doppler and contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS for the assessment of visceral vascular diseases. J Clin Gastroenterol 2014;48(10):845–850.

61.

Pang

Jiang

Huang

, et al: Value of endovascular stent placement for symptomatic spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection. Eur J Radiol 2013;82(3):490–496.

62.

Park

Kim

D-I

, et al: Natural history of spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection derived from follow-up after conservative treatment. J Vasc Surg 2011;54(6):1727–1733.

63.

Park

Kim

Cho

, et al: Clinical course and angiographic changes of spontaneous isolated mesenteric artery dissection after conservative treatment. Surg Today 2014;44:2092–2097.

64.

Park

Seo

: Follow-up with computed tomography after spontaneous isolated dissection of the splanchnic artery. Clin Imaging 2018;52:1–7.

65.

Qiu

, et al: Mid-term results of endovascular treatment for spontaneous isolated dissection of the superior mesenteric artery. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2019;58:88–95.

66.

Rong

J-J

Qian

A-M

Sang

H-F

, et al: Immediate and middle term outcome of symptomatic spontaneous isolated dissection of the superior mesenteric artery. Abdom Imaging 2015;40(1):151–158.

67.

Roussel

Pellenc

Corcos

, et al: Spontaneous and isolated dissection of the superior mesenteric artery: Proposal of a management algorithm. Ann Vasc Surg 2015;29(3):475–481.

68.

Sakamoto

Ogawa

Sueyoshi

, et al: Imaging appearances and management of isolated spontaneous dissections of the superior mesenteric artery. Eur J Radiol 2007;64:103–110.

69.

Satokawa

Takase

Wakamatsu

, et al: Long-term outcomes of spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection. Ann Vasc Dis 2019;12:456–459.

70.

Shiraki

Kasamoto

Yasutomi

, et al: Clinical features of spontaneous isolated dissection of abdominal visceral arteries. J Clin Med Res 2020;12(1):13–17.

71.

Sosogi

Sato

Wada

, et al: Clinical course of conservative management for isolated superior mesenteric arterial dissection. Eur J Radiol Open 2019;6:192–197.

72.

Sun

, et al: Morphologic findings and management strategy of spontaneous isolated dissection of the celiac artery. J Vasc Surg 2016;64:389–394.

73.

Sun

Chen

Zhang

: Application of endovascular stent placement as a remedy for spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection. Vascular 2014;22:350–355.

74.

Suzuki

Furui

Kohtake

, et al: Isolated dissection of the superior mesenteric artery: CT findings in six cases. Abdom Imaging 2004;29(2):153–157.

75.

Takach

Madjarov

Holleman

, et al: Spontaneous splanchnic dissection: Application and timing of therapeutic options. J Vasc Surg 2009;50(3):557–563.

76.

Takayama

Miyata

Shirakawa

, et al: Isolated spontaneous dissection of the splanchnic arteries. J Vasc Surg 2008;48(2):329–333.

77.

Tanaka

Yoshimuta

Kimura

, et al: Clinical characteristics of spontaneous isolated visceral artery dissection. J Vasc Surg 2018;67(4):1127–1133.

78.

Tokue

Tsushima

Endo

: Imaging findings and management of isolated dissection of the visceral arteries. Jpn J Radiol 2009;27(10):430–437.

79.

Tomita

Obara

Sekimoto

, et al: Evolution of computed tomographic characteristics of spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection during conservative management. Circ J 2016;80:1452–1459.

80.

Verde

Bleich

Oshmyansky

, et al: Isolated celiac and superior mesenteric artery dissection identified with MDCT: Imaging findings and clinical course. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2012;36(5):539–545.

81.

Wang

Chen

Shi

, et al: Mesenteric artery remodeling after conservative management in patients with isolated mesenteric artery dissection. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2019;30(12):1964–1971.

82.

Wen

Wang

, et al: Endovascular stentgraft-repair of spontaneous isolated dissection of the superior mesenteric artery. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2018;41:692–698.

83.

Wang

, et al: Combination of colour duplex and contrast enhanced ultrasound as an alternative to computed tomography angiography in isolated mesenteric artery dissection surveillance. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2019;58(6):884–889.

84.

, et al: The significance of the angle between superior mesenteric artery and aorta in spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection. Ann Vasc Surg 2017;45:117–126.

85.

Xiaoq

Hao

Lin

, et al: Clinical and CT angiographic follow-up outcome of spontaneous isolated intramural hematoma of the superior mesenteric artery. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2019;42(8):1088–1094.

86.

Xie

Hao

Xie

, et al: Modified morphological CT classification to screen requirement of endovascular or surgery treatment for spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection. Int J Clin Exp Med 2017;10:6496–6506.

87.

Xiong

Guo

, et al: The value of a new image classification system for planning treatment and prognosis of spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection. Vascular 2015;23:504–512.

88.

Gao

, et al: Management strategy based on disease stages for patients with symptomatic isolated mesenteric artery dissection. Ann Vasc Surg 2020;64:276–284.

89.

Yamaguchi

Murata

Onozawa

, et al: Strategy for the treatment of spontaneous isolated visceral artery dissection. Eur J Radiol Open 2019;6:9–15.

90.

Yoo

Lee

Park

, et al: Classification of spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection: Correlation with multi-detector CT features and clinical presentation. Abdom Radiol 2018;43(11):3157–3165.

91.

Yoshida

Yoshizako

Maruyama

, et al: The value of CT findings for prognostic prediction of spontaneous superior mesenteric artery dissection. Acta Radiol 2019;60:542–548.

92.

Kondo

Chivoya

, et al: Selection and determination of treatment for the spontaneous isolated dissection of the superior mesenteric artery. Ann Vasc Dis 2018;11:101–105.

93.

Zeina

A-R

Nachtigal

Mahamid

, et al: Isolated spontaneous dissection of a visceral artery: A rare cause of epigastric pain. Emerg Radiol 2015;22(3):215–220.

94.

Zerbib

Perot

Lambert

, et al: Management of isolated spontaneous dissection of superior mesenteric artery. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2010;395:437–443.

95.

Zetterwall

Karthaus

Soden

, et al: Clinical presentation, management, follow-up, and outcomes of isolated celiac and superior mesenteric artery dissections. J Vasc Surg 2018;65:91–98.

96.

Zhang

Sun

Chen

, et al: Therapeutic regimen options for isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection. Vasc Endovascular Surg 2012;46(3):277–282.

97.

Zhang

Xiang

Yang

, et al: Correlation between computed tomography features and clinical presentation and management of isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2018;56(6):911–917.

98.

Moher

Liberati

Tetzlaff

, et al: Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009;6(6):e1000097.

99.

Hamm

Bassand

Agewall

, et al: ESC guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation. Eur Heart J 2011;32:2999–3054.

100.

Health at a glance 2013: OECD indicators, p. 87, http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/Health-at-a-Glance-2013.pdf

101.

Kim

Labropoulos

: The role of aortomesenteric angle in occurrence of spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection. Int Angiol 2020;39:125–130.

102.

Luan

Guan

, et al: Isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection in China. J Vasc Surg 2016;63:530–536.

103.

Avdic

Franzén

Zarrouk

, et al: Reduced long-term risk of aortic aneurysm and aortic dissection among individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A nationwide observational study. J Am Heart Assoc 2018;7(3):e007618.

104.

Acosta

Björck

: Modern treatment of acute mesenteric ischemia. Br J Surg 2014;101:100–108.

105.

Jia

Chen

, et al: Endovascular treatment of patients with isolated mesenteric artery dissection aneurysm: Bare stents versus stent assisted coiling. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2019;57:400–406.

106.

Min

Shan

, et al: Spontaneous isolated dissection and atherosclerotic plaques of superior mesenteric artery: The vastly different occurrence site suggests the opposite haemodynamic aetiology. Br J Radiol 2017;90(1075):20170178.

107.

Zhu

Peng

, et al: Treatment strategies and outcomes of symptomatic spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endovasc Ther 2018;25(5):640–648.

108.

Ahn

Han

, et al: The use of antithrombotics is not beneficial for conservative management of spontaneous isolated dissection of the superior mesenteric artery: A meta-analysis. Ann Vasc Surg 2019;60:415–423.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.10 MB