Clinical presentation, management, follow-up, and outcomes of isolated celiac and superior mesenteric artery dissections.

OBJECTIVE: Isolated visceral artery dissections are rare entities with no current consensus guidelines for treatment and follow-up. This study aims to evaluate the presentation, management, outcomes, and follow-up practices for patients with isolated visceral artery dissections and to compare those with and without symptoms.

METHODS: In this retrospective analysis, we identified all patients with isolated celiac artery and/or isolated superior mesenteric artery dissections at a single institution between September 2006 and December 2014. Patients with concomitant aortic dissections were excluded. Cases were stratified by symptom status. Presentation, anatomic findings, treatment, outcomes, and follow-up imaging were then compared between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients.

RESULTS: We identified 25 patients including 15 with symptoms and 10 without. There were no differences in patient comorbidities; however, symptomatic patients more frequently presented with thrombus (n = 10; 67% vs n = 1; 10%; P = .01) and inflammation (n = 8; 53% vs n = 1; 10%; P = .04), and trended toward increased stenosis (n = 12; 80% vs n = 4; 40%; P = .09) compared with asymptomatic patients. All asymptomatic patients were treated with observation alone with vessel diameter enlargement noted in 33% (n = 2) of patients on follow-up imaging. Among symptomatic patients, standard treatment included a short course of anticoagulation (mean, 4.5 months) with lifelong antiplatelet therapy. Three patients underwent operative intervention for persistent or worsening symptoms, two during the index admission and one 10 months after presentation for chronic abdominal pain. Approximately 70% (n = 17) of patients in each group had follow-up imaging (computed tomography angiography: n = 14; 56%; magnetic resonance angiography: n = 4; 16%; ultrasound: n = 13; 52%). Among patients treated nonoperatively, no patients complained of symptoms at follow-up, and 50% of those with inflammation on initial imaging had resolution. Twenty-five percent (n = 4) of patients had an increase in vessel size; however, all vessels remained less than 2 cm in maximal diameter. There were no ruptures or related deaths in either group.

CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with visceral artery dissection, no ruptures occurred but diameter enlargement was documented. This disease progression suggests that routine surveillance may be appropriate; however, transitioning early to ultrasound imaging should be considered to decrease radiation, contrast, and associated costs.