Xiujuan Gao1, Weiping Xie2, Dan Shang3, Jianyong Liu3, Bi Jin3, Ying Jiang Xu4,5. 1. Department of Cerebrovascular Surgery, Binzhou Medical University Hospital, Binzhou, PR China. 2. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Peoplement of RehabilDingtao District, Heze City, PR China. 3. Department of Vascular Surgery, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, PR China. 4. Department of Interventional Vascular Surgery, Binzhou Medical University Hospital, Binzhou, PR China. 5. Key Laboratory of Metabolism and Molecular Medicine, The Ministry of Education, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Fudan University Shanghai Medical College, Shanghai, PR China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical features and management strategy for patients with symptomatic spontaneous isolated celiac artery dissection (SICAD). METHODS: In this retrospective study, consecutive patients with symptomatic SICAD from two institutions were included. The demographics, clinical manifestations, comorbidities, imaging findings and treatment strategy selection were obtained from the medical records. The general epidemiological data, treatment regimens and clinical and follow-up outcomes were analysed. RESULTS: Patients were divided into the conservative treatment group (group A, n = 26) and endovascular treatment group (group B, n = 11). Of these 37 patients, extent of dissection in both groups included only celiac trunk (61.54%% vs. 18.18%, p = 0.03), common hepatic artery (CHA) and splenic artery (SA) (3.85%% vs. 54.55%, p = 0.001), CHA (7.69% vs. 18.18%, p = 0.57), SA (23.08% vs. 9.09, p = 0.65) and left gastric artery (LGA) (3.85% vs. 54.55%, p = 0.99). Of note, the extension of the lesion in group A was shorter than that in group B. In addition, there were significantly more type IIb in group A than in group B (42.31% vs. 9.09%, p = 0.06) and the mean length of dissection in group A was 42.3 ± 54.71 mm which was significantly shorter than that in the group B 58.45 ± 3.71 mm (p =0.04). During a median follow-up of 11.5 months, the 1, 3, 6 and 12 month follow-ups were completed in 100% (37/37), 100% (37/37), 94.59% (35/37) and 91.19% (34/37) of patients, respectively. The cumulative rate of persistent disease stability in patients with endovascular treatment group was higher than in that conservative treatment group at the 3, 6, 9 and 12 months (50% vs. 16.67%, p = 0.001; 80% vs. 37.5%, p =0.03; 100% vs. 62.5%, p = 0.012;100% vs. 91.67%, p = 0.02 respectively). CONCLUSION: Most symptomatic SICAD have a tendency to persistent disease stability after conservative treatment. Risk factors for failed conservative treatment were length of dissection and branch involvement. Furthermore, endovascular treatment was associated with a high technical success and persistent disease stability rate, which might be reserved for patients with failed conservative treatment.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical features and management strategy for patients with symptomatic spontaneous isolated celiac artery dissection (SICAD). METHODS: In this retrospective study, consecutive patients with symptomatic SICAD from two institutions were included. The demographics, clinical manifestations, comorbidities, imaging findings and treatment strategy selection were obtained from the medical records. The general epidemiological data, treatment regimens and clinical and follow-up outcomes were analysed. RESULTS:Patients were divided into the conservative treatment group (group A, n = 26) and endovascular treatment group (group B, n = 11). Of these 37 patients, extent of dissection in both groups included only celiac trunk (61.54%% vs. 18.18%, p = 0.03), common hepatic artery (CHA) and splenic artery (SA) (3.85%% vs. 54.55%, p = 0.001), CHA (7.69% vs. 18.18%, p = 0.57), SA (23.08% vs. 9.09, p = 0.65) and left gastric artery (LGA) (3.85% vs. 54.55%, p = 0.99). Of note, the extension of the lesion in group A was shorter than that in group B. In addition, there were significantly more type IIb in group A than in group B (42.31% vs. 9.09%, p = 0.06) and the mean length of dissection in group A was 42.3 ± 54.71 mm which was significantly shorter than that in the group B 58.45 ± 3.71 mm (p =0.04). During a median follow-up of 11.5 months, the 1, 3, 6 and 12 month follow-ups were completed in 100% (37/37), 100% (37/37), 94.59% (35/37) and 91.19% (34/37) of patients, respectively. The cumulative rate of persistent disease stability in patients with endovascular treatment group was higher than in that conservative treatment group at the 3, 6, 9 and 12 months (50% vs. 16.67%, p = 0.001; 80% vs. 37.5%, p =0.03; 100% vs. 62.5%, p = 0.012;100% vs. 91.67%, p = 0.02 respectively). CONCLUSION: Most symptomatic SICAD have a tendency to persistent disease stability after conservative treatment. Risk factors for failed conservative treatment were length of dissection and branch involvement. Furthermore, endovascular treatment was associated with a high technical success and persistent disease stability rate, which might be reserved for patients with failed conservative treatment.