Download PDF
Semin intervent Radiol 2024; 41(06): 536-546
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1800823
Review Article

Clinical Imaging and Innovations in Aortic Aneurysm and Dissection

Nicholas S. Burris
1   Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
,
Prabhvir S. Marway
1   Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
,
Carlos Alberto Campello Jorge
1   Department of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Imaging plays a central role in the management of patients with aortic disease. Such imaging can be made particularly complex by changing terminology and definitions, overlapping pathologies, and unfamiliarity with evolving endovascular treatment approaches. This article will review basic principles of aortic imaging that can be applied across a variety of settings and pathologies, with a description of key best practices and potential pitfalls for image acquisition, diagnostic assessment, and reporting. Additionally, the topic of imaging in the setting of endovascular aortic repair will be addressed, as well as a variety of imaging-related diagnostic challenges in the setting of chronic aortic dissection, including surgically repaired type A and uncomplicated type B dissections. Finally, recent developments in advanced aortic imaging will be highlighted with descriptions of several areas of promising research that may yield significant advances in imaging of aortic disease.

Keywords

aortic aneurysm - dissection - endovascular repair - imaging - interventional radiology


Publication History

Article published online:
09 December 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Kallianos KG, Burris NS. Imaging thoracic aortic aneurysm. Radiol Clin North Am 2020; 58 (04) 721-731
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Burris NS, Allen BD, Williams DM. Long-term imaging of the aorta: considerations and comparison of modalities. In: Sellke FW, Coselli JS, Sundt TM, Bavaria JE, Sodha NR. eds. Aortic Dissection and Acute Aortic Syndromes. Cham:: Springer International Publishing;; 2021: 189-206
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 3 Asch FM, Yuriditsky E, Prakash SK. et al; GenTAC Investigators. The need for standardized methods for measuring the aorta: multimodality core lab experience from the GenTAC Registry. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2016; 9 (03) 219-226
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Quint LE, Liu PS, Booher AM, Watcharotone K, Myles JD. Proximal thoracic aortic diameter measurements at CT: repeatability and reproducibility according to measurement method. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2013; 29 (02) 479-488
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Müller-Eschner M, Rengier F, Partovi S. et al. Accuracy and variability of semiautomatic centerline analysis versus manual aortic measurement techniques for TEVAR. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2013; 45 (03) 241-247
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Plonek T, Berezowski M, Bochenek M. et al. A comparison of aortic root measurements by echocardiography and computed tomography. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2019; 157 (02) 479-486
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Ameli-Renani S, Pavlidis V, Morgan RA. Secondary endoleak management following TEVAR and EVAR. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2020; 43 (12) 1839-1854
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 AbuRahma AF, Yacoub M, Mousa AY. et al. Aortic neck anatomic features and predictors of outcomes in endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms following vs not following instructions for use. J Am Coll Surg 2016; 222 (04) 579-589
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Chun JY, de Haan M, Maleux G, Osman A, Cannavale A, Morgan R. CIRSE standards of practice on management of Endoleaks following endovascular aneurysm repair. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2024; 47 (02) 161-176
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Coulston J, Baigent A, Selvachandran H, Jones S, Torella F, Fisher R. The impact of endovascular aneurysm repair on aortoiliac tortuosity and its use as a predictor of iliac limb complications. J Vasc Surg 2014; 60 (03) 585-589
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Mansukhani NA, Brown KR, Zheng X, Mao J, Goodney PP, Hoel AW. High incidence of type 2 endoleak and low associated adverse events in the Vascular Quality Initiative linked to Medicare claims. J Vasc Surg 2023; 78 (02) 351-361
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Lalys F, Durrmann V, Duménil A. et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of preoperative risk factors of Type II Endoleaks after endovascular aneurysm repair. Ann Vasc Surg 2017; 41: 284-293
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Deslarzes-Dubuis C, Stern JR, Tran K, Colvard B, Lee JT. Fenestrated endovascular repair with large device diameters (34-36 mm) is associated with Type 1 and 3 Endoleak and reintervention. Ann Vasc Surg 2022; 80: 235-240
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Lisik JP, Curry G, Buckenham T. Pseudoendoleak: a post-endovascular aortic repair ultrasound surveillance pitfall - single institution case series. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2022; 66 (08) 1059-1064
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Wong S, Mastracci TM, Katsargyris A, Verhoeven EL. The role of mandatory lifelong annual surveillance after thoracic endovascular repair. J Vasc Surg 2012; 56 (06) 1786-1793
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Nambi P, Sengupta R, Krajcer Z, Muthupillai R, Strickman N, Cheong BY. Non-contrast computed tomography is comparable to contrast-enhanced computed tomography for aortic volume analysis after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2011; 41 (04) 460-466
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Chaikof EL, Dalman RL, Eskandari MK. et al. The Society for Vascular Surgery practice guidelines on the care of patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg 2018; 67 (01) 2-77.e2
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Upchurch Jr GR, Escobar GA, Azizzadeh A. et al. Society for Vascular Surgery clinical practice guidelines of thoracic endovascular aortic repair for descending thoracic aortic aneurysms. J Vasc Surg 2021; 73 (1S): 55S-83S
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Lombardi JV, Hughes GC, Appoo JJ. et al. Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) and Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) reporting standards for type B aortic dissections. J Vasc Surg 2020; 71 (03) 723-747
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Ersoy H, Jacobs P, Kent CK, Prince MR. Blood pool MR angiography of aortic stent-graft endoleak. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 182 (05) 1181-1186
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Ichihashi S, Marugami N, Tanaka T. et al. Preliminary experience with superparamagnetic iron oxide-enhanced dynamic magnetic resonance imaging and comparison with contrast-enhanced computed tomography in endoleak detection after endovascular aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 2013; 58 (01) 66-72
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Yamanaka Y, Sano M, Katahashi K. et al. Pre-operative four dimensional flow sensitive magnetic resonance imaging assessment of aortic side branches as a method to predict risk of Type II Endoleak resulting in sac enlargement after EVAR. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2023; 66 (01) 17-26
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Dong Z, Fu W, Wang Y. et al. Stent graft-induced new entry after endovascular repair for Stanford type B aortic dissection. J Vasc Surg 2010; 52 (06) 1450-1457
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Beebe HG, Kritpracha B, Serres S, Pigott JP, Price CI, Williams DM. Endograft planning without preoperative arteriography: a clinical feasibility study. J Endovasc Ther 2000; 7 (01) 8-15
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Lu CY, Diao YK, Guo YQ, Zhang XH, Bai HL, Li ZL. Can multiphase dynamic CT angiography provide a better assessment of aortic dissection compared with the standard triphasic protocol?. Acta Radiol 2018; 59 (01) 58-64
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Estrera AL, Miller III CC, Safi HJ. et al. Outcomes of medical management of acute type B aortic dissection. Circulation 2006; 114 (01) I384-I389
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Svensson LG, Labib SB, Eisenhauer AC, Butterly JR. Intimal tear without hematoma: an important variant of aortic dissection that can elude current imaging techniques. Circulation 1999; 99 (10) 1331-1336
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Yang B, Rosati CM, Norton EL. et al. Endovascular fenestration/stenting first followed by delayed open aortic repair for acute Type A aortic dissection with malperfusion syndrome. Circulation 2018; 138 (19) 2091-2103
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Williams DM, Lee DY, Hamilton BH. et al. The dissected aorta: part III. Anatomy and radiologic diagnosis of branch-vessel compromise. Radiology 1997; 203 (01) 37-44
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 van Bakel PAJ, Henry M, Kim KM. et al. Imaging features of renal malperfusion in aortic dissection. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2022; 61 (04) 805-813
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Durham CA, Cambria RP, Wang LJ. et al. The natural history of medically managed acute type B aortic dissection. J Vasc Surg 2015; 61 (05) 1192-1198
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Nienaber CA, Kische S, Rousseau H. et al; INSTEAD-XL Trial. Endovascular repair of type B aortic dissection: long-term results of the randomized investigation of stent grafts in aortic dissection trial. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2013; 6 (04) 407-416
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Romeiro AB, Nogueira C, Coelho A, Mansilha A. Predictors of adverse events in uncomplicated type B aortic dissection: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Int Angiol 2021; 40 (05) 416-424
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Higashigaito K, Sailer AM, van Kuijk SMJ. et al. Aortic growth and development of partial false lumen thrombosis are associated with late adverse events in type B aortic dissection. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2021; 161 (04) 1184-1190.e2
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Marway PS, Campello Jorge CA, Tjahjadi N. et al. Early 3D growth in uncomplicated Type B aortic dissection is associated with long-term outcomes. J Vasc Surg 2024; 1 :S0741-5214(24)01819-6.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 36 Bian Z, Zhong J, Dominic J, Christensen GE, Hatt CR, Burris NS. Validation of a robust method for quantification of three-dimensional growth of the thoracic aorta using deformable image registration. Med Phys 2022; 49 (04) 2514-2530
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 37 Burris NS, Bian Z, Dominic J. et al. Vascular deformation mapping for CT surveillance of thoracic aortic aneurysm growth. Radiology 2022; 302 (01) 218-225
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 38 Marlevi D, Sotelo JA, Grogan-Kaylor R. et al. False lumen pressure estimation in type B aortic dissection using 4D flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance: comparisons with aortic growth. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2021; 23 (01) 51
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 39 Burris NS, Nordsletten DA, Sotelo JA. et al. False lumen ejection fraction predicts growth in type B aortic dissection: preliminary results. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2020; 57 (05) 896-903
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 40 Allen BD, Kilinc O, Pradella M. et al. Entry tear hemodynamics detect patients with adverse aorta-related outcomes in Type B aortic dissection. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2023; 16 (05) 711-712
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 41 Zilber ZA, Boddu A, Malaisrie SC. et al. Noninvasive morphologic and hemodynamic evaluation of Type B aortic dissection: state of the art and future perspectives. Radiol Cardiothorac Imaging 2021; 3 (03) e200456
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 42 Kristensen SL, Mogensen UM, Jhund PS. et al. Clinical and echocardiographic characteristics and cardiovascular outcomes according to diabetes status in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction: a report from the I-Preserve Trial (Irbesartan in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction). Circulation 2017; 135 (08) 724-735
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 43 Norton EL, Wu X, Kim KM. et al. Is hemiarch replacement adequate in acute type A aortic dissection repair in patients with arch branch vessel dissection without cerebral malperfusion?. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2021; 161 (03) 873-884.e2
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 44 Tamura K, Chikazawa G, Hiraoka A, Totsugawa T, Sakaguchi T, Yoshitaka H. The prognostic impact of distal anastomotic new entry after acute type I aortic dissection repair. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2017; 52 (05) 867-873
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 45 White A, Bozso SJ, Ouzounian M, Chu MWA, Moon MC. Canadian Thoracic Aortic Collaborative. Acute type A aortic dissection and the consequences of a patent false lumen. JTCVS Tech 2021; 9: 1-8
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar