Clinical characteristics and misdiagnosis of spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection

Table 3 Diagnostic method for or proof of SISMAD (N = 110)

Diagnostic method for or proof of SISMAD	N (%)
Imaging examination at another hospital showed disease of the SMA	41 (37.3)
Suspected aortic dissection; patient underwent abdominal aortic CTA	10 (9.1)
Plain CT showed changes to the SMA; patient underwent CTA	17 (15.5)
Plain CT findings suggested that CECT should be performed next	3 (2.7)
Plain CT findings could not explain the clinical symptoms; patient underwent CECT	35 (31.8)
Plain CT findings were negative	22 (20.0)
Plain CT findings were positive but did not include the above findings	13 (11.8)
Other*	4 (3.6)

^*Other: One patient was diagnosed with scapulohumeral periarthritis and then underwent positron emission tomography-CT, the findings of which showed SISMAD. Three patients complained of recurrent abdominal pain and were diagnosed with gastrointestinal dysfunction. These patients underwent gastroenterological endoscopy; however, the findings were negative, so they underwent CECT or CTA. SISMAD spontaneous isolated superior mesenteric artery dissection, SMA superior mesenteric artery, CTA computed tomography angiography, CT computed tomography, CECT contrast-enhanced computed tomography, DSA digital subtraction angiography

ISSN: 1471-2261