Conservative versus stent treatment for spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection after the failure of initial 3 days’ conservative treatment: A 10-year follow-up study

Abstract

Objectives To compare the safety and effectiveness of conservative and stent treatment for spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection (SISMAD) patients after the failure of initial 3 days’ conservative treatment. Methods All newly diagnosed SISMAD patients between 2013 and 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. After the failure of 3 days’ conservative treatment, all patients were recommended for stent treatment, but some patients refused to choose it. Their demographic, radiologic, and clinical data were compared. Results 57 patients were not improved after initial 3 days’ conservative treatment. Among them, 19 patients were chose to receive stent placement and 38 patients were continually treated with conservative treatment. The median follow-up time was 92.0 (range 62.7–120.4) months. There were no bowel ischemia and arterial rupture. No significant difference was observed in clinical complete recovery (Conservative 31/38 vs Stent 12/19, p =.19) and hospitalization time (Conservative 8.3 ± 1.7 days vs Stent 7.2 ± 1.5 days, p =.59) between conservative and stent treatment groups. Significant statistical differences were found in radiological complete remodeling (6/38 vs 16/19, p < .01) and hospitalization expense (8662 ± 2886 China Yuan vs 32,935 ± 11,767 China Yuan, p < .01) between these two groups. Conclusions Although undergoing the failure of initial 3 days’ conservative treatment, continue conservative treatment still is safe and effective for SISMAD patients. Stent placement could be chosen as an alternative treatment, especially for patients potentially with bowel ischemia or arterial rupture.