Accuracy of abdominal examination in the diagnosis of non-ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm

Routine Abdominal Aortic Examination During Echocardiographic Studies Detects Significant Numbers of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm and Should be a Part of Routine Echocardiographic Examinations

BACKGROUND

Early detection and follow-up of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) are important and can be lifesaving. The goal of this study was to evaluate if routine abdominal aorta screenings during echocardiograms can be helpful in detecting asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysm.

METHODS

We retrospective studied consecutive patients who were sent for outpatient routine echocardiograms for various clinical reasons in 2015-2017 until we reached a total of 1000 patients. Starting from the subcostal and then proceeding to the abdomen, a long-axis screening of the abdominal aorta was attempted on all of the patients after the echocardiogram was completed. No patient preparation was given. Imaging began from the subcostal view and proceeded caudally with images obtained every 1-2 cm. Measurement of the aortic diameter was performed from the longitudinal plane using the leading-edge-to-leading-edge method.

RESULTS

The age range was 33-96 years with a median age of 72.4. A total of 273 (27.3%) patients did not have an appropriate window to evaluate AAA. Among the remaining 727 screenings, 18 (2.4%) had dilatation of abdominal aorta or AAA. The dilatation and aneurysms ranged between 2.5 and 4.5 cm in size. Abnormal aortic diameters were as follows: 5 (27.7%) were between 2.5 and 2.9 cm, 6 (33.3%) between 3 and 3.4 cm, 1 (5.5%) between 3.5 and 3.9, 5 (27.7%) between 4.0 and 4.4 cm, and 1 (5.5%) between 4.5 and 4.9 cm.

CONCLUSIONS

Performing routine abdominal aortic examinations during routine echocardiographic exams can detect a significant amount of abdominal aortic aneurysm which can be lifesaving. We suggest adding abdominal aortic assessment to routine echocardiographic examination.

Editor's Choice -- European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2024 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Abdominal Aorto-Iliac Artery Aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

The European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) has developed clinical practice guidelines for the care of patients with aneurysms of the abdominal aorta and iliac arteries in succession to the 2011 and 2019 versions, with the aim of assisting physicians and patients in selecting the best management strategy.

METHODS

The guideline is based on scientific evidence completed with expert opinion on the matter. By summarising and evaluating the best available evidence, recommendations for the evaluation and treatment of patients have been formulated. The recommendations are graded according to a modified European Society of Cardiology grading system, where the strength (class) of each recommendation is graded from I to III and the letters A to C mark the level of evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 160 recommendations have been issued on the following topics: Service standards, including surgical volume and training; Epidemiology, diagnosis, and screening; Management of patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), including surveillance, cardiovascular risk reduction, and indication for repair; Elective AAA repair, including operative risk assessment, open and endovascular repair, and early complications; Ruptured and symptomatic AAA, including peri-operative management, such as permissive hypotension and use of aortic occlusion balloon, open and endovascular repair, and early complications, such as abdominal compartment syndrome and colonic ischaemia; Long term outcome and follow up after AAA repair, including graft infection, endoleaks and follow up routines; Management of complex AAA, including open and endovascular repair; Management of iliac artery aneurysm, including indication for repair and open and endovascular repair; and Miscellaneous aortic problems, including mycotic, inflammatory, and saccular aortic aneurysm. In addition, Shared decision making is being addressed, with supporting information for patients, and Unresolved issues are discussed.

CONCLUSION

The ESVS Clinical Practice Guidelines provide the most comprehensive, up to date, and unbiased advice to clinicians and patients on the management of abdominal aorto-iliac artery aneurysms.

Clinical detection of abdominal aortic aneurysm in a 74-year-old man in chiropractic practice

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article is to present a case of abdominal aortic aneurysm to illustrate its clinical detection through history and physical examination and the importance of this condition to the chiropractic clinical setting.

CLINICAL FEATURES

A 74-year-old retired man consulted a doctor of chiropractic for chronic low back pain. The history and physical examination confirmed chronic sacroiliac and a lumbar facet dysfunction. After 5 weeks, the patient stated he had stomach cramps. After this, a more thorough abdominal examination was done. The doctor of chiropractic detected an enlarged pulsatile mass upon abdominal palpation.

INTERVENTION AND OUTCOME

The patient was sent to the cardiologist and had successful surgery within weeks.

CONCLUSION

An abdominal aortic aneurysm has specific symptoms and associated risk factors. If known risk factors are present, a clinical examination needs to be carried out, even though sensitivity of the clinical examination may be low. It should be a differential diagnosis in every male patient older than 50 years with low back pain. In case of suspicion, the patient should be referred for advanced imaging.

Anesthesia for Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) are the 13th leading cause of death in the United States 1 and approximately 40,000 patients undergo elective AAA repair each year.2 With the population aging, this number is expected to increase. Although the use of endovascular AAA repair is becoming more common, open repair, first reported by Dubost et al. in 1951 remains the gold standard.2 This chapter will review the etiology, risk factors, diagnosis, pathophysiology, operative technique, perioperative management, and postoperative complications of patients undergoing open AAA repair.

Challenges, Controversies, and Advances in Aortic Catastrophes

Emergency physicians (EPs) are commonly faced with life-threatening entities. Particularly challenging are the aortic catastrophes, such as penetrating aortic ulcers (PAUs), intramural hematomas (IMHs), and atypical presentations of acute aortic dissections and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms. Several factors account for this: (1) the rapidly evolving knowledge (particularly in the pathogenesis and precursors of aortic dissection [AD]), (2) the lack of comfort caused by infrequent exposure, (3) the misconceptions about the work up and treatment, (4) the lack of emergent vascular surgery back up in the community, and finally (5) the high short-term mortality and missed rates. Finally, the media has publicized cases of celebrities and other patients who experienced fatal outcomes when their aortic catastrophes went undiagnosed. Practitioners of emergency care should, therefore, understand the challenges, be aware of the recent advances, and help limit the controversies in the evaluation and management of these patients.

Abdominal aortic aneurysm screening: recommendations and controversies

Extensive level one evidence supports routine abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) screening in men aged 65 to 75 years, because AAAs are highly prevalent in this population. Physical examination is an insensitive means of detection. Ruptured AAAs are costly with respect to quality adjusted life years (QALY) lost and medical expenses. Large scale, randomized trials have demonstrated that AAA screening reduces all AAA-related mortality in the screened population and is cost-effective in mid-term follow-up. AAA screening by ultrasound has many advantages over other accepted medical screening programs in its simplicity in structure and the availability of an inexpensive, portable, and reliable means of screening. Additionally, AAA screening almost entirely avoids the negative consequences associated with other screening programs, including the adverse psychological effects and medical costs associated with false-positive examination results. There are subgroups of at-risk women who might benefit from AAA screening, and this issue should be further studied.