Developer site: The content shown here is test data.

MyEClinic
MyEClinic
Health Dictionary AI Health Chat Find an Online Doctor
A serene Zen garden with raked sand and smooth stones, symbolising clarity and calm

Health Dictionary

Reliable, easy-to-read patient information on common medical conditions — written in plain language, free of jargon, and grounded in current evidence. Browse the most frequent diagnoses, understand what they mean for everyday life, and learn which steps and questions help you have a focused conversation with your doctor.

Back to skin conditions

Aortic dissection imaging in acute aortic dissection

Introduction

Overview

Overview

There are a wide variety of imaging studies that can be used to diagnose aortic dissection, but in general, transesophageal imaging is the imaging modality of choice in the acutely ill patient and MRI is the imaging modality of choice in the assessment of longstanding aortic disease in a patient who has chronic chest pain who is hemodynamically stable or for the evaluation of a chronic dissection.

Imaging in Acute aortic dissection

Imaging in Acute aortic dissection

Use of Transesophageal Echo Imaging in the Acute Setting

In the management of the acute patient with suspected aortic dissection, a transesophageal echo performed acutely in the emergency room is the preferred approach. If the patient is hemodynamically unstable, then a transesophageal echo can be performed in the operating room as the patient after the patient has been induced and is being prepared for surgery.

Use of MRI Imaging in the Absence of Acute Disease

MRI is the imaging modality of choice in the assessment of

Use of CT Scanning

A CT scan can be used if neither a TEE nor MRI is available in a timely fashion, or if there is a contraindication to their performance. An example would be after hours in an emergency room setting. If the results of the CT scan are non-diagnostic, they TEE or MRI should be performed to confirm the diagnosis.

Use of Aortography

Aortography is rarely used in the modern era. It can be used of the other imaging modalities are not available or are inconclusive.

Use of Coronary Angiography

Pre-operative angiography has not been associated with improved outcomes in retrospective analyses. It is reasonable to perform coronary angiography in the following scenarios:

2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines[1]

2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines[1]

Recommendations for HTAD: Genetic Testing and Screening of Family Members for TAD Referenced studies that support the recommendations are summarized in the Online Data Supplement

Class I
1. In patients with aortic root/ascending aortic aneurysms or aortic dissection, obtaining a multigenerational family history of TAD, unexplained sudden deaths, and peripheral and intracranial aneurysms is  recommended. (Level of Evidence: B-NR)
2. In patients with aortic root/ascending aortic aneurysms or aortic dissection and risk factors for HTAD (Table 8, Figure 17), genetic testing to identify pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (ie, mutations) is  recommended.(Level of Evidence: B-NR)
3. In patients with an established pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant in a gene predispos-ing to HTAD, it is recommended that genetic counseling be provided and the patient’s clini-cal management be informed by the specific gene and variant in the gene.(Level of Evidence: B-NR)
4. In patients with TAD who have a pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant, genetic testing of at-risk biological relatives (ie, cascade testing) is recommended.6,10,11 In family members who are found by genetic screening to have inherited the pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant, aortic imaging with TTE (if aortic root and ascending aorta are adequately visualized, otherwise with CT or MRI) is recommended. (Level of Evidence: B-NR)
5. In a family with aortic root/ascending aor-tic aneurysms or aortic dissection, if the disease-causing variant is not identified with genetic testing, screening aortic imag-ing (as per recommendation 4) of at-risk biological relatives (ie, cascade testing) is  recommended.(Level of Evidence: B-NR)
6. In patients with aortic root/ascending aortic aneurysms or aortic dissection, in the absence of either a known family history of TAD or pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant, screening aortic imaging (as per recommendation 4) of first-degree relatives is recommended.(Level of Evidence: C-LD)
7. In patients with acute type A aortic dissection, the diameter of the aortic root and ascending aorta should be recorded in the operative note and medical record to inform the management of affected  relatives(Level of Evidence: C-EO)

Recommendations for Aortic Imaging Techniques to Determine Presence and Progression of Aortic Disease Referenced studies that support the recommendations are summarized in the Online Data Supplement

Class I
1. In patients with known or suspected aortic disease, aortic diameters should be measured at reproducible anatomic landmarks perpendicular to axis of blood flow, and these measurement methods should be reported in a clear and consistent manner. In cases of asymmetric or oval contour, the longest diameter and its perpendicular diameter should be reported. (Level of Evidence: B-NR)

2. In patients with known or suspected aortic disease, episodic and cumulative ionizing radiation doses should be kept as low as feasible while maintaining diagnostic image quality(Level of Evidence: C-LD)

3.In patients with known or suspected aortic disease, when performing CT or MR imaging, it is recommended that the root and ascending aortic diameters be measured from inner-edge to inner-edge, using an electrocardiographic-synchronized technique. If there are aortic wall abnormalities, such as atherosclerosis or discrete wall thickening (more common in the distal aorta), the outer-edge to outer-edge diameter should be reported(Level of Evidence: C-EO)

4. In patients with known or suspected aortic disease, the aortic root diameter should be recorded as maximum sinus to sinus measurement. In the setting of known asymmetry, multiple measurements should be reported, and both short- and long-axis images of the root should be obtained to avoid underestimation of the diameter.(Level of Evidence: C-EO)

Class IIa
1. In patients with known or suspected aortic disease, it is reasonable that a dilated root or ascending aorta be indexed to patient height or BSA in the report, to aid in clinical risk assessment.(Level of Evidence: C-LD)

2. In patients with known or suspected aortic disease, when performing echocardiography, it is reasonable to measure the aorta from leading-edge to leading-edge, perpendicular to the axis of blood flow.(Level of Evidence: C-EO)

Class IIb
1. In patients with known or suspected aortic disease, when performing echocardiography, it is reasonable to measure the aorta from leading-edge to leading-edge, perpendicular to the axis of blood flow. Using inner-edge to inner-edge measurements may also be considered, particularly on short-axis imaging.(Level of Evidence: C-EO)

Recommendations for Diagnostic and Surveillance Aortic Imaging in Marfan Syndrome Referenced studies that support the recommendations are summarized in the Online Data Supplement

Class I
1. In patients with Marfan syndrome, a TTE is recommended at the time of initial diagnosis, to determine the diameters of the aortic root and ascending aorta, and 6 months thereafter, to determine the rate of aortic growth; if the aortic diameters are stable, an annual surveillance TTE is recommended.1 If the aortic root, ascending aorta, or both are not adequately visualized on TTE, a CT or MRI of the thoracic aorta is recommended.22aC-EO2. In adults with Marfan syndrome, after the initial TTE, a CT or MRI of the thoracic aorta is reasonable to confirm the aortic diameters and assess the remainder of the thoracic aorta.(Level of Evidence: C-EO)
2.In patients with Marfan syndrome who have undergone aortic root replacement, surveillance imaging of the thoracic aorta by MRI (or CT) is recommended to evaluate for distal TAD, initially annually and then, if normal in diameter and unchanged after 2 years, every other year(Level of Evidence: C-LD)
Class IIa
1. In adults with Marfan syndrome, after the initial TTE, a CT or MRI of the thoracic aorta is reasonable to confirm the aortic diameters and assess the remainder of the thoracic aorta.(Level of Evidence: C-EO)

2.In patients with Marfan syndrome who have undergone aortic root replacement, surveil-lance imaging every 3 to 5 years for potential AAA is reasonable.(Level of Evidence: C-LD)

Recommendations for Imaging in Loeys-Dietz Syndrome

Class I
1. In patients with Loeys-Dietz syndrome, a baseline TTE is recommended to determine the diameters of the aortic root and ascending aorta, and 6 months thereafter to determine the rate of aortic growth; if the aortic diameters are stable, annual surveillance TTE is recommended.(Level of Evidence: C-EO)
2. In patients with Loeys-Dietz syndrome and a dilated or dissected aorta and/or arterial branches at baseline, annual surveillance imaging of the affected aorta and arteries with MRI or CT is recommended.(Level of Evidence: C-EO)
3. In patients with Loeys-Dietz syndrome, a baseline MRI or CT from head to pelvis is recommended to evaluate the entire aorta and its branches for aneurysm, dissection, and tortuosity.(Level of Evidence: C-EO)
Class IIa
1.In patients with Loeys-Dietz syndrome with-out dilation of the aorta distal to the aortic root or ascending aorta and without dilated or dissected arterial branches, surveillance imaging from chest to pelvis with MRI (or CT) every 2 years is reasonable, but imaging may be more frequent depending on family  history(Level of Evidence: C-EO)

2.In patients with Loeys-Dietz syndrome with-out dilation of the cerebral arteries on initial screening, periodic imaging surveillance for cerebral aneurysms with MRI or CT every 2 to 3 years is reasonable.(Level of Evidence: C-EO)

Recommendations for Diagnostic Testing, Surveillance, and Surgical Intervention for Aortic Dilation in Turner Syndrome Referenced studies that support the recommendations are summarized in the Online Data Supplement

Class I
1. In patients with Turner syndrome, TTE and cardiac MRI are recommended at the time of diagnosis to evaluate for BAV, aortic root and ascending aortic dilation, aortic coarctation, and other congenital heart defects.(Level of Evidence: B-NR)

2. In patients with Turner syndrome who are ≥15 years old, the use of the ASI (ratio of aortic diameter [cm] to BSA [m2]) is recommended to define the degree of aortic dilation and assess the risk of aortic  dissection(Level of Evidence: B-NR)

3. In patients with Turner syndrome without risk factors for aortic dissection (Table 12), sur-veillance imaging with TTE or MRI to evalu-ate the aorta is recommended every 5 years in children and every 10 years in adults, as well as before planning a  pregnancy(Level of Evidence: C-LD)

4. In patients with Turner syndrome and an ASI >2.3 cm/m2, surveillance imaging of the aorta is recommended at least  annually(Level of Evidence: C-EO)

5. In patients with Turner syndrome and risk factors for aortic dissection (Table 12), surveil-lance aortic imaging at an interval depending on the aortic diameter, ASI, and aortic growth rate is recommended (Level of Evidence: C-EO)

Class IIa
1. In patients with Turner syndrome who are ≥15 years old and have an ASI of ≥2.5 cm/m2plus risk factors for aortic dissection (Table 12), surgical intervention to replace the aortic root, ascending aorta, or both is reasonable.9,102bC-EOIn those without risk factors for aortic  dissection, surgical intervention to replace the aortic root, ascending aorta, or both may be considered.(Level of Evidence: C-LD)
Class IIb
1. In those without risk factors for aortic  dissection, surgical intervention to replace the aortic root, ascending aorta, or both may be considered.(Level of Evidence: C-EO)

Recommendations for HTAD: Genetic Testing and Screening of Family Members for TAD Referenced studies that support the recommendations are summarized in the Online Data Supplement

Class I
1. In patients with aortic root/ascending aortic aneurysms or aortic dissection, obtaining a multigenerational family history of TAD, unexplained sudden deaths, and peripheral and intracranial aneurysms is  recommended.(Level of Evidence: B-NR)

2. In patients with aortic root/ascending aortic aneurysms or aortic dissection and risk factors for HTAD (Table 8, Figure 17), genetic testing to identify pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (ie, mutations) is  recommended.(Level of Evidence: B-NR)

3. In patients with an established pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant in a gene predisposing to HTAD, it is recommended that genetic counseling be provided and the patient’s clinical management be informed by the specific gene and variant in the gene.(Level of Evidence: B-NR)

4. In patients with TAD who have a pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant, genetic testing of at-risk biological relatives (ie, cascade testing) is recommended.6,10,11 In family members who are found by genetic screening to have inherited the pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant, aortic imaging with TTE (if aortic root and ascending aorta are adequately visualized, otherwise with CT or MRI) is recommended.(Level of Evidence: B-NR)

5. In a family with aortic root/ascending aortic aneurysms or aortic dissection, if the disease-causing variant is not identified with genetic testing, screening aortic imaging (as per recommendation 4) of at-risk biological relatives (ie, cascade testing) is  recommended.(Level of Evidence: B-NR)

6. In patients with aortic root/ascending aortic aneurysms or aortic dissection, in the absence of either a known family history of TAD or pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant, screening aortic imaging (as per recommendation 4) of first-degree relatives is recommended.(Level of Evidence: C-LD)

7. In patients with acute type A aortic dissection, the diameter of the aortic root and ascending aorta should be recorded in the operative note and medical record to inform the management of affected  relatives.(Level of Evidence: C-EO)

Recommendations for Inflammatory Aortitis: Diagnosis and Treatment of Takayasu Arteritis and GCA Referenced studies that support the recommendations are summarized in the Online Data Supplement

Class I
1.In patients with large vessel vasculitis (LVV), prompt evaluation of the entire aorta and branch vessels with MRI or CT, with or without 18F-FDG positron emission tomography (FDG-PET), is  recommended.(Level of Evidence: C-LD)

Recommendations for Aortic Imaging Techniques to Determine Presence and Progression of Aortic Disease Referenced studies that support the recommendations are summarized in the Online Data Supplement

Class I
1.In patients with known or suspected aortic disease, aortic diameters should be measured at reproducible anatomic landmarks perpendicular to axis of blood flow, and these measurement methods should be reported in a clear and consistent manner. In cases of asymmetric or oval contour, the longest diam-eter and its perpendicular diameter should be reported(Level of Evidence: B-NR)

2. In patients with known or suspected aortic disease, episodic and cumulative ionizing radiation doses should be kept as low as feasible while maintaining diagnostic image quality.(Level of Evidence: C-LD)

3. In patients with known or suspected aortic disease, when performing CT or MR imaging, it is recommended that the root and ascending aortic diameters be measured from inner-edge to inner-edge, using an electrocardiographic-synchronized technique. If there are aortic wall abnormalities, such as atherosclerosis or discrete wall thickening (more common in the distal aorta), the outer-edge to outer-edge diameter should be reported (Table 4)(Level of Evidence: C-EO)

4. In patients with known or suspected aortic disease, the aortic root diameter should be recorded as maximum sinus to sinus mea-surement. In the setting of known asymmetry, multiple measurements should be reported, and both short- and long-axis images of the root should be obtained to avoid underestima-tion of the diameter.(Level of Evidence: C-EO)

Class IIa
1.In patients with known or suspected aortic disease, it is reasonable that a dilated root or ascending aorta be indexed to patient height or BSA in the report, to aid in clinical risk assessment(Level of Evidence: C-LD)

2.In patients with known or suspected aortic disease, when performing echocardiography, it is reasonable to measure the aorta from leading-edge to leading-edge, perpendicular to the axis of blood flow.(Level of Evidence: C-EO)

Class IIb
1. Using inner-edge to inner-edge measure-ments may also be considered, particularly on short-axis imaging.(Level of Evidence: C-EO)

Recommendations for BAV Aortopathy Referenced studies that support the recommendations are summarized in the Online Data Supplement

Class I
1. In patients with a BAV, TTE is indicated to evaluate valve morphology and function, to evaluate the diameter of the aortic root and ascending aorta, and to evaluate for aortic coarctation and other associated cardiovascular defects.(Level of Evidence: B-NR)

2. In patients with a BAV, CT or MRI of the thoracic aorta is indicated when the diameter and morphology of the aortic root, ascending aorta, or both cannot be assessed accurately or completely by TTE.(Level of Evidence: C-LD) 3. In patients with a BAV and either HTAD or phenotypic features concerning for Loeys-Dietz syndrome, a medical genetics evaluation is recommended(Level of Evidence: C-LD)

4. In patients with a BAV and a dilated aortic root or ascending aorta, screening of all first-degree relatives by TTE is recommended to evaluate for the presence of a BAV, dilation of the aortic root and ascending aorta, or both; if the diameter and morphology of the aortic root, ascending aorta, or both cannot be assessed accurately or completely by TTE, a cardiac-gated CT or MRI of the thoracic aorta is indicated.(Level of Evidence: C-LD)

Class IIa
1. In patients with a BAV, screening of all first-degree relatives by TTE is reasonable to evaluate for the presence of a BAV, dilation of the aortic root and ascending aorta, or  both (Level of Evidence: B-NR)

Recommendations for Long-Term Surveillance Imaging After Aortic Dissection and IMH Referenced studies that support the recommendations are summarized in the Online Data Supplement

Class I
1. In patients who have had an acute aortic dissection and IMH treated with either open or endovascular aortic repair and have residual aortic disease, surveillance imaging with a CT (or MRI) is recommended after 1 month, 6 months, and 12 months and then, if stable, annually thereafter.(Level of Evidence: B-NR)

2. In patients who have had an acute aortic dissection and IMH that was managed with medical therapy alone, surveillance imaging with a CT (or MRI) is recommended after 1 month, 6 months, and 12 months and then, if stable, annually thereafter(Level of Evidence: B-NR)

2010 ACCF/AHA/AATS/ACR/ASA/SCA/SCAI/SIR/STS/SVM Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Thoracic Aortic Disease (DO NOT EDIT)[2]

2010 ACCF/AHA/AATS/ACR/ASA/SCA/SCAI/SIR/STS/SVM Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Thoracic Aortic Disease (DO NOT EDIT)[2]

Screening Tests (DO NOT EDIT)[2]

Class I
“1. The role of chest x-ray in the evaluation of possible thoracic aortic disease should be directed by the patient’s pretest risk of disease as follows:
a. Intermediate risk: Chest x-ray should be performed on all intermediate-risk patients, as it may establish a clear alternate diagnosis that will obviate the need for definitive aortic imaging. (Level of Evidence: C)
b. Low risk: Chest x-ray should be performed on all low-risk patients, as it may either establish an alternative diagnosis or demonstrate findings that are suggestive of thoracic aortic disease, indicating the need for urgent definitive aortic imaging. (Level of Evidence: C)”
“2. Urgent and definitive imaging of the aorta using transesophageal echocardiogram, computed tomographic imaging, or magnetic resonance imaging is recommended to identify or exclude thoracic aortic dissection in patients at high risk for the disease by initial screening.[3][4][5][6][7][8][9] (Level of Evidence: B)”
Class III (No Benefit)
“1. A negative chest x-ray should not delay definitive aortic imaging in patients determined to be high risk for aortic dissection by initial screening. (Level of Evidence: C)”

Aortic Imaging Techniques to Determine the Presence and Progression of Aortic Disease (DO NOT EDIT)[2]

Class I
“1. In patients with known or suspected aortic disease, aortic diameters should be mea-sured at reproducible anatomic landmarks perpendicular to axis of blood flow, and these measurement methods should be reported in a clear and consistent manner. In cases of asymmetric or oval contour, the longest diameter and its perpendicular diameter should be reported. (Level of Evidence: B-NR)”
“2. For measurements taken by computed tomographic imaging or magnetic resonance imaging, the external diameter should be measured perpendicular to the axis of blood flow. For aortic root measurements, the widest diameter, typically at the mid-sinus level, should be used. (Level of Evidence: C)”
“3. For measurements taken by echocardiography, the internal diameter should be measured perpendicular to the axis of blood flow. For aortic root measurements the widest diameter, typically at the mid-sinus level, should be used. (Level of Evidence: C)”
“4. Abnormalities of aortic morphology should be recognized and reported separately even when aortic diameters are within normal limits. (Level of Evidence: C)”
“5. The finding of aortic dissection, aneurysm, traumatic injury and/or aortic rupture should be immediately communicated to the referring physician. (Level of Evidence: C)”
“6. Techniques to minimize episodic and cumulative radiation exposure should be utilized whenever possible.[10][11] (Level of Evidence: B)”
Class IIa
“1. If clinical information is available, it can be useful to relate aortic diameter to the patient’s age and body size. (Level of Evidence: C)”
Class IIb
“1. If clinical information is available, it can be useful to relate aortic diameter to the patient’s age and body size. (Level of Evidence: C)”

Genetic Syndromes (DO NOT EDIT)[2]

Class I
“1. An echocardiogram is recommended at the time of diagnosis of Marfan syndrome to determine the aortic root and ascending aortic diameters and 6 months thereafter to determine the rate of enlargement of the aorta. (Level of Evidence: C)”
“2. Annual imaging is recommended for patients with Marfan syndrome if stability of the aortic diameter is documented. If the maximal aortic diameter is 4.5 cm or greater, or if the aortic diameter shows significant growth from baseline, more frequent imaging should be considered. (Level of Evidence: C)”
“3. Patients with Loeys-Dietz syndrome or a confirmed genetic mutation known to predispose to aortic aneurysms and aortic dissections (TGFBR1, TGFBR2, FBN1, ACTA2, or MYH11) should undergo complete aortic imaging at initial diagnosis and 6 months thereafter to establish if enlargement is occurring.[12][13][14][15] (Level of Evidence: C)”
“4. Patients with Loeys-Dietz syndrome should have yearly magnetic resonance imaging from the cerebrovascular circulation to the pelvis.[16][17][18] (Level of Evidence: B)”
“5. Patients with Turner syndrome should undergo imaging of the heart and aorta for evidence of bicuspid aortic valve, coarctation of the aorta, or dilatation of the ascending thoracic aorta.[19] If initial imaging is normal and there are no risk factors for aortic dissection, repeat imaging should be performed every 5 to 10 years or if otherwise clinically indicated. If abnormalities exist, annual imaging or follow-up imaging should be done. (Level of Evidence: C)”
Class IIa
“1. It is reasonable to consider surgical repair of the aorta in all adult patients with Loeys-Dietz syndrome or a confirmed TGFBR1 or TGFBR2 mutation and an aortic diameter of 4.2 cm or greater by transesophageal echocardiogram (internal diameter) or 4.4 to 4.6 cm or greater by computed tomographic imaging and/or magnetic resonance imaging (external diameter).[17] (Level of Evidence: C)”
“2. For women with Marfan syndrome contemplating pregnancy, it is reasonable to prophylactically replace the aortic root and ascending aorta if the diameter exceeds 4.0 cm.[12] (Level of Evidence: C)”
“3. If the maximal cross-sectional area in square centimeters of the ascending aorta or root divided by the patient’s height in meters exceeds a ratio of 10, surgical repair is reasonable because shorter patients have dissection at a smaller size and 15% of patients with Marfan syndrome have dissection at a size smaller than 5.0 cm.[14][20][21] (Level of Evidence: C)”
Class IIb
“1. In patients with Turner syndrome with additional risk factors, including bicuspid aortic valve, coarctation of the aorta, and/or hypertension, and in patients who attempt to become pregnant or who become pregnant, it may be reasonable to perform imaging of the heart and aorta to help determine the risk of aortic dissection. (Level of Evidence: C)”

Familial Thoracic Aortic Aneurysms and Dissections (DO NOT EDIT)[2]

Class I
“1. Aortic imaging is recommended for first-degree relatives of patients with thoracic aortic aneurysm and/or dissection to identify those with asymptomatic disease.[22][23] (Level of Evidence: B)”
“2. If the mutant gene (FBN1, TGFBR1, TGFBR2, COL3A1, ACTA2, MYH11) associated with aortic aneurysm and/or dissection is identified in a patient, first-degree relatives should undergo counseling and testing. Then, only the relatives with the genetic mutation should undergo aortic imaging. (Level of Evidence: C)”
Class IIa
“1. If one or more first-degree relatives of a patient with known thoracic aortic aneurysm and/or dissection are found to have thoracic aortic dilatation, aneurysm, or dissection, then imaging of second-degree relatives is reasonable.[22] (Level of Evidence: B)”

Takayasu Arteritis and Giant Cell Arteritis (DO NOT EDIT)[2]

Class I
“1. The initial evaluation of Takayasu arteritis or giant cell arteritis should include thoracic aorta and branch vessel computed tomographic imaging or magnetic resonance imaging to investigate the possibility of aneurysm or occlusive disease in these vessels. (Level of Evidence: C)”

Diagnostic Imaging Studies (DO NOT EDIT)[2]

Class I
“1. Selection of a specific imaging modality to identify or exclude aortic dissection should be based on patient variables and institutional capabilities, including immediate availability. (Level of Evidence: C)”
“2. If a high clinical suspicion exists for acute aortic dissection but initial aortic imaging is negative, a second imaging study should be obtained.[24] (Level of Evidence: C)”

Bicuspid Aortic Valve and Associated Congenital Variants in Adults (DO NOT EDIT)[2]

Class I
“1. First-degree relatives of patients with a bicuspid aortic valve, premature onset of thoracic aortic disease with minimal risk factors, and/or a familial form of thoracic aortic aneurysm and dissection should be evaluated for the presence of a bicuspid aortic valve and asymptomatic thoracic aortic disease. (Level of Evidence: C)”
“2. All patients with a bicuspid aortic valve should have both the aortic root and ascending thoracic aorta evaluated for evidence of aortic dilatation.[25][26][27][28] (Level of Evidence: B)”

Surveillance of Thoracic Aortic Disease or Previously Repaired Patients (DO NOT EDIT)[2]

Class IIa
“1. Computed tomographic imaging or magnetic resonance imaging of the thoracic aorta is reasonable after a Type A or B aortic dissection or after prophylactic repair of the aortic root/ ascending aorta.[12] (Level of Evidence: C)”
“2. Computed tomographic imaging or magnetic resonance imaging of the aorta is reasonable at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postdissection and, if stable, annually thereafter so that any threatening enlargement can be detected in a timely fashion. (Level of Evidence: C)”
“3. When following patients with imaging, utilization of the same modality at the same institution is reasonable, so that similar images of matching anatomic segments can be compared side by side. (Level of Evidence: C)”
“4. If a thoracic aortic aneurysm is only moderate in size and remains relatively stable over time, magnetic resonance imaging instead of computed tomographic imaging is reasonable to minimize the patient’s radiation exposure. (Level of Evidence: C)”
“5. Surveillance imaging similar to classic aortic dissection is reasonable in patients with intramural hematoma. (Level of Evidence: C)”
References

References

  1. ↑ Writing Committee Members. Isselbacher EM, Preventza O, Hamilton Black J, Augoustides JG, Beck AW; et al. (2022). “2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines”. J Am Coll Cardiol. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2022.08.004. PMID 36334952 Check |pmid= value (help).
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 Hiratzka LF, Bakris GL, Beckman JA; et al. (2010). “2010 ACCF/AHA/AATS/ACR/ASA/SCA/SCAI/SIR/STS/SVM guidelines for the diagnosis and management of patients with Thoracic Aortic Disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American College of Radiology, American Stroke Association, Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Interventional Radiology, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, and Society for Vascular Medicine”. Circulation. 121 (13): e266–369. doi:10.1161/CIR.0b013e3181d4739e. PMID 20233780. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  3. ↑ Yoshida S, Akiba H, Tamakawa M; et al. (2003). “Thoracic involvement of type A aortic dissection and intramural hematoma: diagnostic accuracy–comparison of emergency helical CT and surgical findings”. Radiology. 228 (2): 430–5. doi:10.1148/radiol.2282012162. PMID 12819341. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  4. ↑ Sommer T, Fehske W, Holzknecht N; et al. (1996). “Aortic dissection: a comparative study of diagnosis with spiral CT, multiplanar transesophageal echocardiography, and MR imaging”. Radiology. 199 (2): 347–52. PMID 8668776. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  5. ↑ Zeman RK, Berman PM, Silverman PM; et al. (1995). “Diagnosis of aortic dissection: value of helical CT with multiplanar reformation and three-dimensional rendering”. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 164 (6): 1375–80. PMID 7754876. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  6. ↑ Shiga T, Wajima Z, Apfel CC, Inoue T, Ohe Y (2006). “Diagnostic accuracy of transesophageal echocardiography, helical computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging for suspected thoracic aortic dissection: systematic review and meta-analysis”. Arch. Intern. Med. 166 (13): 1350–6. doi:10.1001/archinte.166.13.1350. PMID 16831999. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  7. ↑ Nienaber CA, von Kodolitsch Y, Nicolas V; et al. (1993). “The diagnosis of thoracic aortic dissection by noninvasive imaging procedures”. N. Engl. J. Med. 328 (1): 1–9. doi:10.1056/NEJM199301073280101. PMID 8416265. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  8. ↑ Erbel R, Engberding R, Daniel W, Roelandt J, Visser C, Rennollet H (1989). “Echocardiography in diagnosis of aortic dissection”. Lancet. 1 (8636): 457–61. PMID 2563839. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  9. ↑ Börner N, Erbel R, Braun B, Henkel B, Meyer J, Rumpelt J (1984). “Diagnosis of aortic dissection by transesophageal echocardiography”. Am. J. Cardiol. 54 (8): 1157–8. PMID 6496346. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  10. ↑ Amis ES, Butler PF, Applegate KE; et al. (2007). “American College of Radiology white paper on radiation dose in medicine”. J Am Coll Radiol. 4 (5): 272–84. doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2007.03.002. PMID 17467608. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  11. ↑ Brenner DJ, Hall EJ (2007). “Computed tomography–an increasing source of radiation exposure”. N. Engl. J. Med. 357 (22): 2277–84. doi:10.1056/NEJMra072149. PMID 18046031. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  12. ↑ 12.0 12.1 12.2 Pearson GD, Devereux R, Loeys B; et al. (2008). “Report of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and National Marfan Foundation Working Group on research in Marfan syndrome and related disorders”. Circulation. 118 (7): 785–91. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.783753. PMC 2909440. PMID 18695204. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  13. ↑ Svensson LG, Crawford ES, Coselli JS, Safi HJ, Hess KR (1989). “Impact of cardiovascular operation on survival in the Marfan patient”. Circulation. 80 (3 Pt 1): I233–42. PMID 2766531. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  14. ↑ 14.0 14.1 Svensson LG, Blackstone EH, Feng J; et al. (2007). “Are Marfan syndrome and marfanoid patients distinguishable on long-term follow-up?”. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 83 (3): 1067–74. doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2006.10.062. PMID 17307461. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  15. ↑ Zhu L, Vranckx R, Khau Van Kien P; et al. (2006). “Mutations in myosin heavy chain 11 cause a syndrome associating thoracic aortic aneurysm/aortic dissection and patent ductus arteriosus”. Nat. Genet. 38 (3): 343–9. doi:10.1038/ng1721. PMID 16444274. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  16. ↑ LeMaire SA, Pannu H, Tran-Fadulu V, Carter SA, Coselli JS, Milewicz DM (2007). “Severe aortic and arterial aneurysms associated with a TGFBR2 mutation”. Nat Clin Pract Cardiovasc Med. 4 (3): 167–71. doi:10.1038/ncpcardio0797. PMC 2561071. PMID 17330129. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  17. ↑ 17.0 17.1 Loeys BL, Schwarze U, Holm T; et al. (2006). “Aneurysm syndromes caused by mutations in the TGF-beta receptor”. N. Engl. J. Med. 355 (8): 788–98. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa055695. PMID 16928994. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  18. ↑ Williams JA, Loeys BL, Nwakanma LU; et al. (2007). “Early surgical experience with Loeys-Dietz: a new syndrome of aggressive thoracic aortic aneurysm disease”. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 83 (2): S757–63, discussion S785–90. doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2006.10.091. PMID 17257922. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  19. ↑ Bondy CA, Turner Syndrome Study Group (2007). “Care of girls and women with Turner syndrome: a guideline of the Turner Syndrome Study Group”. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 92 (1): 10–25. doi:10.1210/jc.2006-1374. PMID 17047017.
  20. ↑ Gott VL, Greene PS, Alejo DE; et al. (1999). “Replacement of the aortic root in patients with Marfan’s syndrome”. N. Engl. J. Med. 340 (17): 1307–13. doi:10.1056/NEJM199904293401702. PMID 10219065. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  21. ↑ Svensson LG, Khitin L (2002). “Aortic cross-sectional area/height ratio timing of aortic surgery in asymptomatic patients with Marfan syndrome”. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 123 (2): 360–1. PMID 11828302. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  22. ↑ 22.0 22.1 Albornoz G, Coady MA, Roberts M; et al. (2006). “Familial thoracic aortic aneurysms and dissections–incidence, modes of inheritance, and phenotypic patterns”. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 82 (4): 1400–5. doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2006.04.098. PMID 16996941. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  23. ↑ Coady MA, Davies RR, Roberts M; et al. (1999). “Familial patterns of thoracic aortic aneurysms”. Arch Surg. 134 (4): 361–7. PMID 10199307. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  24. ↑ Svensson LG, Labib SB, Eisenhauer AC, Butterly JR (1999). “Intimal tear without hematoma: an important variant of aortic dissection that can elude current imaging techniques”. Circulation. 99 (10): 1331–6. PMID 10077517. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  25. ↑ Braverman AC, Güven H, Beardslee MA, Makan M, Kates AM, Moon MR (2005). “The bicuspid aortic valve”. Curr Probl Cardiol. 30 (9): 470–522. doi:10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2005.06.002. PMID 16129122. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  26. ↑ Borger MA, David TE (2005). “Management of the valve and ascending aorta in adults with bicuspid aortic valve disease”. Semin. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 17 (2): 143–7. doi:10.1053/j.semtcvs.2005.02.005. PMID 16087084.
  27. ↑ Svensson LG, Blackstone EH, Cosgrove DM (2003). “Surgical options in young adults with aortic valve disease”. Curr Probl Cardiol. 28 (7): 417–80. doi:10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2003.08.002. PMID 14647130. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)
  28. ↑ Svensson LG (2008). “Aortic valve stenosis and regurgitation: an overview of management”. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 49 (2): 297–303. PMID 18431353. Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)

Cardiology

Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]; Associate Editor(s)-in-Chief: Aarti Narayan, M.B.B.S [2]