RESUMO
Purpose@#Spontaneous isolated dissection of the celiac artery (SID-CA) and superior mesenteric artery (SID-SMA) are rare vascular diseases with similar presentation, yet comparative studies have not been reported. In this study, we compared their characteristics with the aim of providing insights into their etiology. @*Materials and Methods@#Patients diagnosed with symptomatic SID-CA and SIDSMA between July 2009 and December 2018 were included. Demographics, clinical presentation, radiologic findings, treatment strategies, and outcomes were analyzed. @*Results@#Twenty-one patients with SID-CA and 40 patients with SID-SMA were compared. Demographics and initial abdominal pain characteristics were similar, but pain severity was significantly higher and associated mean fasting time was significantly longer in patients with SID-CA than in those with SID-SMA (fasting time 3.2 vs 2.1 days, P=0.001). Most patients were successfully treated conservatively without recurrent pain or aneurysmal dilatation, but 33.3% patients with SID-CA and 17.5% with SID-SMA required endovascular intervention. More favorable remodeling in terms of dissection regression on follow-up computed tomography was found after stenting, where patients with SID-CA showed better remodeling than those with SID-SMA. The overall median follow-up period was 22-31 months, while for patients with stent insertion, it was 55-77 months, and no stent occlusions were found during this period. @*Conclusion@#Patients with SID-CA presented with severer and longer-duration abdominal pain than those with SID-SMA. Stenting in both groups showed good long-term patency and favorable remodeling, with a higher regression rate for SIDCA. Based on our results, patients with SID-CA may benefit more from active endovascular intervention.
RESUMO
Purpose@#Spontaneous isolated dissection of the celiac artery (SID-CA) and superior mesenteric artery (SID-SMA) are rare vascular diseases with similar presentation, yet comparative studies have not been reported. In this study, we compared their characteristics with the aim of providing insights into their etiology. @*Materials and Methods@#Patients diagnosed with symptomatic SID-CA and SIDSMA between July 2009 and December 2018 were included. Demographics, clinical presentation, radiologic findings, treatment strategies, and outcomes were analyzed. @*Results@#Twenty-one patients with SID-CA and 40 patients with SID-SMA were compared. Demographics and initial abdominal pain characteristics were similar, but pain severity was significantly higher and associated mean fasting time was significantly longer in patients with SID-CA than in those with SID-SMA (fasting time 3.2 vs 2.1 days, P=0.001). Most patients were successfully treated conservatively without recurrent pain or aneurysmal dilatation, but 33.3% patients with SID-CA and 17.5% with SID-SMA required endovascular intervention. More favorable remodeling in terms of dissection regression on follow-up computed tomography was found after stenting, where patients with SID-CA showed better remodeling than those with SID-SMA. The overall median follow-up period was 22-31 months, while for patients with stent insertion, it was 55-77 months, and no stent occlusions were found during this period. @*Conclusion@#Patients with SID-CA presented with severer and longer-duration abdominal pain than those with SID-SMA. Stenting in both groups showed good long-term patency and favorable remodeling, with a higher regression rate for SIDCA. Based on our results, patients with SID-CA may benefit more from active endovascular intervention.