Cargando…

Analysis of safety and efficacy of conservative treatment and endovascular treatment in patients with spontaneous isolated mesenteric artery dissection

BACKGROUND: Spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection (SISMAD) is a rare disease with abdominal pain as the main clinical manifestation, but its optimal treatment strategy has not yet been determined. Based on this, this study explored a safe and effective treatment method by analyz...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chen, Xiaobin, Xu, Lei, Xu, Zhaojun, Fan, Zuyou, Huang, Jianqiang, Li, Junjie, Zhang, ZaiZhong, Lin, Chen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9852537/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36684275
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.944079
_version_ 1784872664859410432
author Chen, Xiaobin
Xu, Lei
Xu, Zhaojun
Fan, Zuyou
Huang, Jianqiang
Li, Junjie
Zhang, ZaiZhong
Lin, Chen
author_facet Chen, Xiaobin
Xu, Lei
Xu, Zhaojun
Fan, Zuyou
Huang, Jianqiang
Li, Junjie
Zhang, ZaiZhong
Lin, Chen
author_sort Chen, Xiaobin
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection (SISMAD) is a rare disease with abdominal pain as the main clinical manifestation, but its optimal treatment strategy has not yet been determined. Based on this, this study explored a safe and effective treatment method by analyzing and comparing the safety and efficacy of conservative treatment and endovascular treatment in SISMAD patients. METHODS: The clinical and imaging data and treatment effects of 85 patients with SISMAD who were admitted to the General Surgery Department of the 900th Hospital of the Joint Logistics Support Force of the Chinese People's Liberation Army from January 2008 to December 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Two groups were treated, the data of patients in conservative treatment group and endovascular treatment group were analyzed, and a safe and effective treatment method for SISMAD was discussed. RESULTS: The mean follow-up time was 36.58 ± 25.03 months. The success rate of interventional operation was 86.11% (31/36), and the operation failed because the guide wire could not enter the true lumen in four cases. One case was terminated due to poor physical condition of the patient who could not tolerate surgery. There were no significant differences in gender, body mass index, clinical manifestations, and past history between conservative treatment and endovascular treatment (P > 0.05), but in age, superior mesenteric artery-distal aorta angle, distance from the superior mesenteric artery opening to dissection, dissection length, and true lumen stenosis. There was a statistical difference between the two groups in the rate and Yun classification (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Conservative treatment is effective for most symptomatic SISMAD patients, and close monitoring is required; for patients with persistent symptoms and severe true lumen stenosis (especially Yun classification type III), endovascular treatment is preferred; endovascular treatment is mainly based on endovascular bare stent placement. Patients receiving stent implantation may suffer from stent stenosis or occlusion in the long term, and most of them have no obvious symptoms of intestinal ischemia; the prognosis is good.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9852537
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98525372023-01-21 Analysis of safety and efficacy of conservative treatment and endovascular treatment in patients with spontaneous isolated mesenteric artery dissection Chen, Xiaobin Xu, Lei Xu, Zhaojun Fan, Zuyou Huang, Jianqiang Li, Junjie Zhang, ZaiZhong Lin, Chen Front Surg Surgery BACKGROUND: Spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection (SISMAD) is a rare disease with abdominal pain as the main clinical manifestation, but its optimal treatment strategy has not yet been determined. Based on this, this study explored a safe and effective treatment method by analyzing and comparing the safety and efficacy of conservative treatment and endovascular treatment in SISMAD patients. METHODS: The clinical and imaging data and treatment effects of 85 patients with SISMAD who were admitted to the General Surgery Department of the 900th Hospital of the Joint Logistics Support Force of the Chinese People's Liberation Army from January 2008 to December 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Two groups were treated, the data of patients in conservative treatment group and endovascular treatment group were analyzed, and a safe and effective treatment method for SISMAD was discussed. RESULTS: The mean follow-up time was 36.58 ± 25.03 months. The success rate of interventional operation was 86.11% (31/36), and the operation failed because the guide wire could not enter the true lumen in four cases. One case was terminated due to poor physical condition of the patient who could not tolerate surgery. There were no significant differences in gender, body mass index, clinical manifestations, and past history between conservative treatment and endovascular treatment (P > 0.05), but in age, superior mesenteric artery-distal aorta angle, distance from the superior mesenteric artery opening to dissection, dissection length, and true lumen stenosis. There was a statistical difference between the two groups in the rate and Yun classification (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Conservative treatment is effective for most symptomatic SISMAD patients, and close monitoring is required; for patients with persistent symptoms and severe true lumen stenosis (especially Yun classification type III), endovascular treatment is preferred; endovascular treatment is mainly based on endovascular bare stent placement. Patients receiving stent implantation may suffer from stent stenosis or occlusion in the long term, and most of them have no obvious symptoms of intestinal ischemia; the prognosis is good. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-01-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9852537/ /pubmed/36684275 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.944079 Text en © 2023 Chen, Xu, Xu, Fan, Huang, Li and Lin. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Surgery
Chen, Xiaobin
Xu, Lei
Xu, Zhaojun
Fan, Zuyou
Huang, Jianqiang
Li, Junjie
Zhang, ZaiZhong
Lin, Chen
Analysis of safety and efficacy of conservative treatment and endovascular treatment in patients with spontaneous isolated mesenteric artery dissection
title Analysis of safety and efficacy of conservative treatment and endovascular treatment in patients with spontaneous isolated mesenteric artery dissection
title_full Analysis of safety and efficacy of conservative treatment and endovascular treatment in patients with spontaneous isolated mesenteric artery dissection
title_fullStr Analysis of safety and efficacy of conservative treatment and endovascular treatment in patients with spontaneous isolated mesenteric artery dissection
title_full_unstemmed Analysis of safety and efficacy of conservative treatment and endovascular treatment in patients with spontaneous isolated mesenteric artery dissection
title_short Analysis of safety and efficacy of conservative treatment and endovascular treatment in patients with spontaneous isolated mesenteric artery dissection
title_sort analysis of safety and efficacy of conservative treatment and endovascular treatment in patients with spontaneous isolated mesenteric artery dissection
topic Surgery
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9852537/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36684275
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.944079
work_keys_str_mv AT chenxiaobin analysisofsafetyandefficacyofconservativetreatmentandendovasculartreatmentinpatientswithspontaneousisolatedmesentericarterydissection
AT xulei analysisofsafetyandefficacyofconservativetreatmentandendovasculartreatmentinpatientswithspontaneousisolatedmesentericarterydissection
AT xuzhaojun analysisofsafetyandefficacyofconservativetreatmentandendovasculartreatmentinpatientswithspontaneousisolatedmesentericarterydissection
AT fanzuyou analysisofsafetyandefficacyofconservativetreatmentandendovasculartreatmentinpatientswithspontaneousisolatedmesentericarterydissection
AT huangjianqiang analysisofsafetyandefficacyofconservativetreatmentandendovasculartreatmentinpatientswithspontaneousisolatedmesentericarterydissection
AT lijunjie analysisofsafetyandefficacyofconservativetreatmentandendovasculartreatmentinpatientswithspontaneousisolatedmesentericarterydissection
AT zhangzaizhong analysisofsafetyandefficacyofconservativetreatmentandendovasculartreatmentinpatientswithspontaneousisolatedmesentericarterydissection
AT linchen analysisofsafetyandefficacyofconservativetreatmentandendovasculartreatmentinpatientswithspontaneousisolatedmesentericarterydissection