Isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection without aortic involvement is an exceptionally rare event. Nonoperative management remains the first-line therapy. However, surgical interventions can be indicated in the event of bowel ischemia. In the present report, we describe a case of complicated isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection treated with a hybrid approach.

We present a case of acute isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection with symptomatic bowel malperfusion requiring surgical intervention. We recommend clinicians and surgeons maintain a high clinical suspicion for mesenteric ischemia in patients presenting with isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection and describe a hybrid open surgical/endovascular approach that can safely be utilized in patients requiring intervention.

UNASSIGNED: Bare stent treatment and bare stent-assisted coiling treatment have not been directly compared in symptomatic isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection with a patent false lumen. Thus, we compared the early and mid-term outcomes of bare stent treatment and bare stent-assisted coiling treatment to determine the most effective remedy for patients with this condition.
UNASSIGNED: Consecutive patients diagnosed with systematic isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection with a patent false lumen admitted to the study hospital between January 2016 and December 2021 were enrolled in this retrospective study. Their demographic data, clinical findings, treatment options, early outcomes, and follow-up results were analyzed.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 85 patients (83 men) were included. 34.1% (n = 29) adopted bare stent treatment and 65.9% (n = 56) underwent bare stent-assisted coiling treatment. The symptoms were relieved in all patients (100%) with bare stent treatment and bare stent-assisted coiling treatment. There was no significant difference in the length of hospital stay between the two endovascular treatments (p = 0.354). The cumulative complete remodeling rate was 100% in bare stent-assisted coiling treatment vs. 70.4% in bare stent treatment (p < 0.0001). The prevalence of adverse events for abdominal pain recurrence (none in BST or bare stent-assisted coiling treatment), and formation of the aneurysm (two in bare stent treatment, and none in bare stent-assisted coiling treatment) showed no significant difference at follow-up.
UNASSIGNED: Both bare stent treatment and bare stent-assisted coiling treatment for symptomatic isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection with a patent false lumen have the same satisfying early outcome. In the midterm follow-up, bare stent-assisted coiling treatment has the higher cumulative complete remodeling rate which could be prioritized to treat this condition.

A 59-year-old male was transported to the emergency department by ambulance with complaints of left-sided abdominal pain. Blood gas analysis revealed elevated lactate, and plain computed tomography revealed no bowel ischemic change. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography revealed isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection with mildly stenosed true lumen. The patient was treated with conservative management on admission. Staged fluid intake, oral prescriptions, and diet were commenced with attention to the symptoms. After four days of hospitalization, the patient was discharged with a stable condition. However, the patient returned to our hospital complaining of left lower back pain three hours after discharge. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography revealed an enlarged false lumen with a moderately stenosed true lumen. After a thorough discussion between vascular surgeons and interventional radiologists, conservative management was commenced on the second admission. The clinical course was uneventful, with proof of improved imaging findings.

A 59-year-old male presented to the emergency department with distressing epigastric pain after seeking medical attention at a nearby clinic three hours prior. Upon examination, the attending physician noticed edematous changes in the proximal segment of the superior mesenteric artery, and a subsequent enhanced computed tomography (CT) scan confirmed the diagnosis of an isolated dissection of the artery. Notably, the true lumen of the vessel was significantly narrowed, raising concerns for potential vascular compromise. After extensive consultation between a vascular surgeon and a radiologist, a decision was made to adopt a conservative management approach. The patient was closely monitored with meticulous bowel rest, hydration management, and carefully curated dietary modifications. Over time, subsequent CT scans revealed progressive enlargement of the true lumen, which was highly reassuring to the medical team. As a result of the expert management and diligent care provided, the patient was eventually discharged home without any adverse events or complications. This case highlights the critical role of a multidisciplinary approach in managing complex vascular pathology and underscores the importance of thoughtful clinical decision-making and meticulous monitoring in achieving favorable outcomes.

BACKGROUND: We compared the early and midterm (31, 3-63 months) outcomes of conservative treatment, bare stent treatment (BST), and bare stent-assisted coiling treatment (BSACT) to determine the most effective treatment for patients with symptomatic isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection (SISMAD).
METHODS: Consecutive patients with SISMAD admitted to the study hospital between January 2016 and December 2021 were included in this retrospective study. Their demographic data, clinical findings, treatment options, early outcomes, and follow-up results were analyzed.
RESULTS: A total of 121 patients were included in the study (23 with conservative treatment, 42 with BST, and 56 with BSACT). Symptoms were relieved in 91.3% of conservative patients, whereas all patients (100%) with BST or BSACT had symptom relief (P = 0.035). There was no significant difference in the length of hospital stay between the 2 endovascular treatments (P = 0.9051), but hospital stay was significantly shorter compared to conservative treatment (P < 0.0001). The cumulative rate of complete remodeling was 100% for BSACT versus 46.3% for BST (P < 0.0001) versus 42.9% for conservative patients (P < 0.0001). There were no significant differences between the last 2 groups (P = 0.3925). The prevalence of adverse events for abdominal pain recurrence and aneurysm formation was also significantly lower in the BSACT group at follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: BSACT for SISMAD has a preferable early outcome. The cumulative complete remodeling rate and the event-free survival rate are satisfactory at midterm follow-up. BSACT is an effective approach for SISMAD.

A 51-year-old man with untreated hypertension developed sudden-onset epigastric pain. Despite a normal D-dimer level, abdominal contrast-enhanced computed tomography revealed superior mesenteric artery dissection. Abdominal contrast-enhanced computed tomography is mandatory when examining patients with sudden-onset abdominal pain, even those with a normal D-dimer level.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: The isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection (SMAD) is a rare and sporadic cause of acute abdominal pain. It most frequently affects male patients in their fifth to sixth decades, while our patient was a young woman who delivered a baby before the onset of abdominal pain. Possible risk factors for SMAD include hypertension, arteriosclerosis, abnormalities in elastic fibres, trauma, and pregnancy. In our case, delivery was suggested as a risk factor, which has not been reported previously.
METHODS: A 27-year-old woman complained of acute severe upper abdominal pain and vomiting for 2 days after delivery. The patient had no significant medical history. Physical examination revealed epigastric mild tenderness. All routine blood tests, blood coagulation analysis, liver function tests and abdomen computed tomography showed no remarkable findings. Computed tomography angiography revealed a marked dissection 3.5 cm below the superior mesenteric artery ostium. Since distal blood flow existed and the patient was in a puerperal state with no evidences of mesenteric ischemia, she was managed conservatively, including intestinal rest by fasting, parenteral nutritional support and antibioticis, without anticoagulants or antiplatelet agents. Fortunately, she recovered smoothly and had no recurrence.
CONCLUSIONS: SMAD is a rare and sporadic cause of acute abdominal pain that occurs in young women after delivery.

Spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection (SISMAD) is a rare vascular disorder, and the treatment strategies remain controversial. This study aimed to compare outcomes of conservative and endovascular treatments in symptomatic patients with SISMAD.
Forty-two consecutive SISMAD patients who were admitted to a single center between October 2009 and May 2018 were enrolled in this study. Based on their symptoms, 15 had conservative treatment, and 27 had endovascular treatment. The baseline characteristics, treatments, and follow-up results of the conservative group and endovascular group were analysed.
The rates of symptom relief were 93.3% in the conservative group and 96.3% in the endovascular group. The procedure-related complications in the endovascular group included one case of pseudoaneurysm formation in the left brachial artery. During the follow-up period (median 28.5 months), a higher proportion of patients in the conservative group had symptom recurrence (42.9% in the conservative group versus 4.8% in the endovascular group, p < 0.001). Four patients in the conservative group and one patient in the endovascular group had additional endovascular intervention during follow-up. Compared with the conservative group, patients in the endovascular group had statistically significantly longer symptom-free survival (p = 0.014) and a higher rate of superior mesenteric artery (SMA) remodeling (p < 0.001).
For symptomatic SISMAD, endovascularly treated patients had a lower rate of symptom recurrence and a higher rate of SMA remodeling in the long term. Prospective, multi-center studies are needed to confirm the long-term outcomes of both treatments.