Although CA and SMA stenosis is a very common clinical condition, mesenteric ischemia rarely develops in patients with stenosis or occlusion in a single mesenteric artery. In patients with stenosis in the CA and SMA, the symptoms of mesenteric collateral circulation are reported to be reduced or delayed [2, 9].
It has been reported that in the majority of CA and/or SMA stenosis cases, anastomosis of the CA and SMA is formed by the GDA and PDA pathway [5, 12, 17, 19, 20]. When the GDA or PDA is insufficient in collateral circulation, the Bühler arch provides an additional collateral pathway and is important in the alleviation of ischemia-related symptoms [12, 15]. Detailed knowledge of the collateral vessels associated with stenosis in CA or SMA is important for the prognostic evaluation of acute and chronic ischemia, as well as for the planning and more safely performing of medical procedures such as pancreaticobiliary and colon surgery, and liver transplantation [10, 17]. The presence of the Bühler arch should also be taken into consideration during surgical interventions in this region such as pancreaticoduodenectomy [6, 12].
In their study, in which the angiography images of 94 patients with CA stenosis were evaluated, Song et al., reported that the presence of GDA was determined in 77 and PDA in 61 of 81 patients with normal hepatic artery anatomy. Of the 13 patients with variant hepatic artery, GDA was reported to be present in 12, and PDA in 10 [17]. In our study, of the 14 patients with isolated CA stenosis, GDA was observed in 5 patients and the Riolan arch in one patient. The absence of collateral vessels in male patients with CA stenosis may be due to a stenosis degree of less than 70% in male patients.
Due to the difficulties in the determination of the Bühler arch, there are only a few studies in the literature related to the Bühler arch. The prevalence of the Bühler arch in studies performed on different populations has been reported to be a mean of 1.71% (range, 0.3–4.1%) [12]. Saad et al. examined the angiography images of 120 asymptomatic liver donors and determined Bühler arch in 4 cases [15]. In another study, Ferrari et al. examined the multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) images of 60 asymptomatic patients and reported Bühler arch in 2 cases [3]. Similarly, Ognjanovic et al. determined the presence of the Bühler arch on 5 of 150 MDCT images of asymptomatic patients [13]. In our study, we observed the Bühler arch in one patient (0.46%) in 215 angiography images, and our finding was consistent with the current literature. Although the Bühler arch is a rare anatomical variation, the presence of this arch is important for embryology, general surgery, and interventional radiology. It may also provide information about the developmental processes defining adult anatomy [12]. In surgical interventions applied to this region, the presence of the Bühler arch can cause intraoperative complications such as bleeding. Therefore, the potential presence of the Bühler arch should be taken into consideration during surgical and radiological interventions to the abdominal region.
The Riolan arch and the Drummond marginal artery are important connections providing collateral blood flow between the SMA and the IMA in when the presence of an occlusion or significant stenosis [4, 8]. There is usually a small amount and slow blood flow in the Riolan arch, which is recessive and of small diameter. It has been reported that the Riolan arch will generally expand after SMA obstruction and can therefore be fully visualized on angiography [4, 22]. As vascularisation of the descending colon is provided by the SMA, the Riolan arch is important in colorectal surgery, especially in cancer patients. In their study by Karatay et al., in which 115 abdominal CT images were evaluated, Drummond marginal artery was found in all the cases and the presence of Riolan arch was reported in 32 (27.8%) [7].
Xie et al. determined the presence of expanded Riolan arch in a total of 47 patients (29 males and 18 females) on MDCT images of 626 patients with large vessel lesions or intestinal disease. Of these cases with Riolan arch, severe SMA stenosis was determined in 16 cases, SMA obstruction in 9 cases, descending colon-sigmoid colon cancer in 8 cases, active ulcerative colitis in 5 cases, and severe IMA stenosis in 2 cases [22]. Normally, as the blood flow load of the SMA is higher than that of the IMA, it has been reported that the Riolan arch expands more in patients with SMA obstruction or severe stenosis than in patients with IMA occlusion [22]. In our study group, the most common collateral vessel in patients with isolated SMA stenosis was the Riolan arch. The presence of the Riolan arch in all patients with both CA and SMA occlusion suggests that collateral circulation is mainly provided through the Riolan arch in these patients.
In a study by Van Petersen et al., 228 patients with suspected chronic mesenteric ischemia were examined, and of 65 patients found to have CA and SMA stenosis of < 70%, GDA was determined in 7 patients, Bühler arch in one patient, and Riolan arch/Drummond marginal artery in 10 patients [20]. Of the cases observed to have < 70% CA stenosis and > 70% SMA stenosis, GDA was determined in 2 cases, and Riolan arch/Drummond marginal artery in 3 cases. Of the 21 patients found to have > 70% CA and SMA stenosis, Riolan arch/Drummond marginal artery was determined in 15 patients. Van Petersen et al., stated that collateral blood flow was basically provided through the GDA only in patients with CA stenosis [20]. Similar to the findings of Van Petersen et al., the most common collateral vessel in patients with isolated CA stenosis in our study was the GDA, supporting the view that the GDA has an important role in mesenteric blood circulation in patients with isolated CA stenosis. Consistent with the findings of Van Petersen et al., the Riolan arch was determined most common collateral vascular pathway in patients with both CA and SMA stenosis in the present study [20]. This finding supports the view that the Riolan arch provides important collateral blood flow between the proximal SMA and IMA when stenosis is present in the CA and SMA. Therefore, this collateral vessel is extremely important for vascular and gastrointestinal surgeons during operative procedures.
Van Petersen et al. reported that mesenteric stenosis > 70% leads to more collateral development and higher flow velocities in the non-stenotic vessel [20]. In our study, similar to the findings of Van Petersen et al., the vast majority of collateral variations were observed in patients with > 70% stenosis. This finding suggests that the rate of 70% stenosis in mesenteric vessels could be a threshold value for collateral development and increasing collateral blood flow. The higher rate of collaterals in females with CA stenosis than males could be due to the fact of the male cases having stenosis < 70%.
Collateral variations related to CA and SMA stenosis and the frequencies of these variations were investigated in this study. The limitation of this study was to include the small number of included patients with an initial diagnosis of mesenteric ischemia. There is, therefore, a need for further studies including a greater number of cases to be able to comprehensive evaluation of collateral development in patients with stenosis.