Clinical characteristics and misdiagnosis of spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection

Abstract

Abstract Background Spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery (SMA) dissection (SISMAD) is a rare disease with a potentially fatal pathology. Due to the lack of specificity of clinical characteristics and laboratory tests, misdiagnosis and missed diagnosis are often reported. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the clinical characteristics and misdiagnosis of SISMAD. Methods In a registry study from January 2013 to December 2020, 110 patients with SISMAD admitted to the First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University were enrolled. Descriptive methods were used to analyse clinical characteristics, laboratory data, diagnostic method or proof, misdiagnosed cases, plain computed tomography (CT) findings and dissection features. To study the relationship between dissection features and treatment modality, the selected patients were classified into the conservative group (n = 71) and the non-conservative group (n = 39). The Chi-square test and Student’s t-test were used to compare the conservative and non-conservative groups. Results One hundred ten patients with SISMAD, including 100 (90.9%) males and 10 (9.1%) females, with a mean age of 52.4 ± 7.6 years, were enrolled in the study. Relevant associated comorbidities included a history of hypertension in 43 cases (39.1%), smoking in 46 cases (41.8%), and alcohol consumption in 34 cases (30.9%). One hundred four patients (94.5%) presented with abdominal pain. Abnormalities in the C-reactive protein lever, white blood cells count and D-dimer lever were the 3 most common abnormal findings. There were 32 misdiagnosis or missed diagnosis. Fourteen cases were misdiagnosed because of insufficient awareness. Twelve cases were misdiagnosed because of disease features. Twenty cases were misdiagnosed as SMA embolism. Among them, There were 15 cases of Yun type IIb SISMAD. Sixty-six patients underwent plain CT. The maximum SMA diameter was 12.1 (11.3–13.1) mm, and the maximum SMA diameter was located on the left renal vein (LRV) plane in 68.2% of cases. Dissection features observed on contrast-enhanced CT (CECT), CT angiography (CTA), or digital subtraction angiography (DSA) showed that there were 70 cases (63.6%) of Yun type IIb SISMAD, the maximum SMA diameter was 13.0 ± 2.4 mm, the location of the maximum SMA diameter was on the LRV plane in 64.5% of cases, and 7.3% of cases were complicated with intestinal obstruction, including bowel necrosis in 3.6% of cases. There were differences between the conservative group and non-conservative groups in the residual true lumen diameter or degree of true lumen stenosis and the presence of intestinal obstruction or bowel necrosis (all P < 0.05). Conclusion For SISMAD, misdiagnosis and missed diagnosis were usually caused by insufficient awareness and disease features. SISMAD should be considered in the differential diagnosis of patients presenting with unexplained abdominal pain, especially males, patients in the 5th decade of life, patients with hypertension, and patients with an enlarged SMA diameter or a maximum SMA diameter located on the LRV plane on plain CT. Mesenteric CTA or CECT should be recommended for the investigation of these conditions.