Accuracy of transthoracic echocardiography in the assessment of proximal aortic diameter in hypertensive patients: comparison with cardiac magnetic resonance

Sex-Specific Morphometric Analysis of Ascending Aorta and Aortic Arch for Planning Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair: A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

In many studies on aortic disease, women are underrepresented. The present study aims to assess sex-specific morphometric differences and gain more insight into endovascular treatment of the ascending aorta (AA) and arch.

METHODS

Electrocardiogram-gated cardiac computed tomography scans of 116 consecutive patients who were evaluated for transcatheter aortic valve replacement were retrospectively reviewed. Measurements of the AA and aortic arch were made in multiplanar views, perpendicular to the semi-automatic centerline. Multiple linear regression analysis was performed to identify predictors affecting AA and aortic arch diameter in men and women. Propensity score matching was used to investigate whether sex influences aortic morphology.

RESULTS

In both sexes, body surface area (BSA) was identified as a positive predictor and diabetes as a negative predictor for aortic diameters. In men, age was identified as a positive predictor and smoking as a negative predictor for aortic diameters. Propensity score matching identified 40 pairs. Systolic and diastolic mean diameters and AA length were significantly wider in men. On average, male aortas were 7.4% wider than female aortas, both in systole and diastole.

CONCLUSIONS

The present analysis demonstrates that, in women, increased BSA is associated with increased aortic arch diameters, while diabetes is associated with decreased AA and arch diameters. In men, increased BSA and age are associated with increased AA and arch diameters, while smoking and diabetes are associated with decreased AA and arch diameters. Men were confirmed to have 7.4% greater AA and arch diameters than women.

CLINICAL IMPACT

Men had 7.4% greater ascending aorta and arch diameters than women in a retrospective cohort, gated computed tomography-based study of 116 patients. Sex-specific differences in ascending aortic and arch size should be considered by aortic endovascular device manufacturers and physicians when developing ascending and arch endografts and planning aortic interventions.

Agreement of Proximal Thoracic Aorta Size by Two-Dimensional Transthoracic Echocardiography and Magnetic Resonance Angiography

There is currently a lack of uniformity in methods of aortic diameter measurements across different imaging modalities. In this study, we sought to evaluate the accuracy of transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) in comparison with magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) for the measurement of proximal thoracic aorta diameters. This is a retrospective analysis of 121 adult patients at our institution who had TTE and electrocardiogram  (ECG)-gated MRA performed within 90 days of each other between 2013 and 2020. Measurements were made at the level of sinuses of Valsalva (SoV), sinotubular junction (STJ), and ascending aorta (AA) using leading edge-to-leading edge (LE) convention for TTE and inner-edge-to-inner-edge (IE) convention for MRA. Agreement was assessed using Bland-Altman methods. Intra- and interobserver variability were assessed by intraclass correlation. The average age of patients in the cohort was 62 years, and 69% of patients were male. The prevalence of hypertension, obstructive coronary artery disease, and diabetes was 66%, 20%, and 11%, respectively. The mean aortic diameter by TTE was SoV 3.8 ± 0.5 cm, STJ 3.5 ± 0.4 cm, and AA 4.1 ± 0.6 cm. The TTE-derived measurements were larger than the MRA ones by 0.2 ± 2 mm, 0.8 ± 2 mm, and 0.4 ± 3 mm at the level of SoV, STJ, and AA, respectively, but the differences were not statistically significant. There were no significant differences in the aorta measurements by TTE compared with MRA, when stratified by gender. In conclusion, transthoracic echocardiogram-derived proximal aorta measurements are comparable to MRA measurements. Our study validates current recommendations that TTE is an acceptable modality for screening and serial imaging of the proximal aorta.

Comparison of cine cardiac magnetic resonance and echocardiography derived diameters of the aortic root in a large population-based cohort

Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and cine cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) are established imaging methods of the aortic root. We aimed to evaluate the comparability of measurements in TTE and standard cine CMR sequences of the aortic root. Our study included 741 subjects (mean age 63.5 ± 8 years, 43.7% female) from the Hamburg City Health Study (HCHS). Subjects underwent CMR and TTE. Aortic root measurements were performed at the level of the aortic annulus (AoAn), sinus of Valsalva (SoV), and sinotubular junction (STJ) by standard cine CMR in left ventricular long axis and left ventricular outflow tract view. Measurements were performed applying the leading-edge to leading-edge (LL) convention and inner-edge to inner-edge (II) convention in TTE and the II convention in CMR. Inter correlation coefficients (ICCs) demonstrated high inter- and intraobserver reproducibility for CMR and TTE measurements of SoV and STJ (ICCs 0.9–0.98) and moderate reproducibility for AoAn (ICCs 0.68–0.91). CMR measurements of SoV and STJ showed strong agreement with TTE: while correlations were comparable (r = 0.75–0.85) bias was lower with TTE II (bias − 0.1 to − 0.74) versus TTE LL measurements (mean bias − 1.49 to − 2.58 mm). The agreement for AoAn was fair (r = 0.51–0.57) with variable bias (mean bias 0.39–3.9). Standard cine CMR and TTE derived aortic root measurements are reproducible and comparable with higher agreement for TTE II instead of LL measurements. These results support an interchangeable application of TTE and standard CMR for screening of aortic root diseases thereby possibly reducing redundant multimodality imaging.

Prognostic role of the ascending aorta dilatation in patients with arterial hypertension

BACKGROUND

Ascending aorta (ASC) dilatation (AAD) is a common finding in arterial hypertension, affecting about 15% of hypertensive patients. AAD is associated with an increase in cardiac and vascular hypertension-related organ damage, but its prognostic role is unknown. The aim of the study was to evaluate the prognostic value of AAD as predictor of cardiovascular events in essential hypertensive patients.

METHODS

Recruited patients underwent two-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography from 2007 to 2013 and followed-up for cardiovascular events until November 2018 by phone call and hospital information system check. ASC diameter and AAD were defined using both absolute and scaled definitions. Four hundred and twenty-three hypertensive patients were included in our study.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up of 7.4 years (interquartile range 5.6-9.1 years), 52 events were observed. After adjusting for age, sex and BSA, both ASC diameter and AAD definition, according to ARGO-SIIA project, resulted associated with a greater risk of cardiovascular event (both P < 0.010), even after adjusting for major confounders (both P < 0.010). Moreover, we observed that the assessment of ASC improves risk stratification compared with pulse wave velocity alone, and that in absence of AAD, sinus of valsalva dilatation lost any prognostic value (P = 0.262).

CONCLUSIONS

ASC diameter and AAD are both associated with a greater risk of cardiovascular events. ASC should be assessed to optimize risk stratification in hypertensive patients and its dilatation may be considered as a surrogate for vascular organ damage.

Multimodality Assessment of Thoracic Aortic Dimensions: Comparison of Computed Tomography Angiography, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, and Echocardiography Measurements

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare thoracic aortic measurements between computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and transthoracic echocardiography (TTE).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 127 patients (mean age: 45±18 y, 49% male) who had undergone CT and MRI evaluation of the thoracic aorta at a single tertiary referral hospital within a 6-month interval between 2007 and 2017 were included in this retrospective study. TTE studies performed within the same 6-month interval were also evaluated. Thoracic aortic measurements were blindly evaluated using multiple techniques and were compared between modalities.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in maximum aortic root diameter between CT and MRI when using the inner lumen-to-inner lumen technique (mean difference: 0.2±1.4 mm, P=0.51) or the outer lumen-to-outer lumen technique (mean difference: 0.5±1.4 mm, P=0.07). There were no significant differences between CT and MRI at any other level except for the distal descending aorta (20.2±4.6 vs. 19.8±4.6 mm, P<0.001). However, aortic root measurements by TTE using the leading edge-to-leading edge technique were significantly smaller compared with maximum aortic root diameters using the inner lumen-to-inner lumen and outer lumen-to-outer lumen techniques by both CT (mean difference: 4.9±2.7 mm, P<0.001 and 7.4±2.8 mm, P<0.001, respectively) and MRI (mean difference: 4.8±3.2 mm, P<0.001 and 8.2±3.0 mm, P<0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

There is excellent agreement in thoracic aortic measurements between CT and MRI. However, TTE significantly underestimates maximum aortic root diameter compared with CT and MRI. Therefore, caution should be used when interpreting small apparent changes in aortic root diameters between TTE and CT or MRI.

Comparison of dynamic changes in aortic diameter during the cardiac cycle measured by computed tomography angiography and transthoracic echocardiography

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine the relationship between dynamic changes in aortic diameter and corresponding measurement methods.

METHODS

Consecutive adult (nonaneurysmal) patients being surgically treated for heart disease (mean age, 51 ± 11 years; range, 29-76 years; N = 25) were included in this study. All patients underwent transthoracic echocardiography (TTE), computed tomography angiography (CTA), and intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS). Anteroposterior diameters were measured at 1 cm above the junction of the aortic sinus, the proximal 1 cm of the innominate artery, and the midpoint of the two.

RESULTS

The average diameter of the proximal ascending aorta in systole/diastole measured by IOUS was 32.07 ± 2.03/30.27 ± 2.05 mm (paired t-test: difference, 1.80 ± 0.46 mm; P < .001). The average diameters of the proximal ascending aorta measured by nonelectrocardiography-gated CTA and TTE were 31.45 ± 1.97 mm and 29.7 ± 1.84 mm, respectively. The average diameter of the mid and distal ascending aorta in systole/diastole measured by IOUS was 32.35 ± 1.95/30.57 ± 1.94 mm (paired t-test: difference, 1.78 ± 0.44 mm; P < .001) and 32.32 ± 1.92/30.67 ± 1.90 mm (paired t-test: difference, 1.65 ± 0.42 mm; P < .001), respectively. The average diameter of the mid and distal ascending aorta measured by CTA was 31.74 ± 1.92 mm and 31.59 ± 1.96 mm, respectively. At each location, the difference in the aortic diameter between systole and diastole was statistically significant (all P values <.001; paired t-test). The minimum and maximum changes in the diameter between systole and diastole were 0.90 mm and 2.70 mm. In all, 96% (24/25) of the average diameters derived from IOUS and CTA at the three locations were within the concordance limit in systole, and 92% to 100% (23/25 to 25/25) were within the concordance limit in diastole. The average diameters derived from IOUS and TTE images of the proximal ascending aorta were within the bounds of the concordance limit 92% (23/25) of the time in systole and 100% (25/25) of the time in diastole. The average diameters derived from CTA and TTE images of the proximal ascending aorta were within the bounds of the concordance limit 88% (22/25) of the time. Pearson correlation coefficients between these groups ranged from 0.905 to 0.982 (all P values <.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The ascending aorta diameters measured by nonelectrocardiography-gated CTA and TTE were consistent with the IOUS measurements.

Intermodality variation of aortic dimensions: How, where and when to measure the ascending aorta

BACKGROUND

No established reference-standard technique is available for ascending aortic diameter measurements. The aim of this study was to determine agreement between modalities and techniques.

METHODS

In patients with aortic pathology transthoracic echocardiography, computed tomography angiography (CTA) and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) were performed. Aortic diameters were measured at the sinus of Valsalva (SoV), sinotubular junction (STJ) and tubular ascending aorta (TAA) during mid-systole and end-diastole. In echocardiography both the inner edge-to-inner edge (I-I edge) and leading edge-to‑leading edge (L-L edge) methods were applied, and the length of the aortic annulus to the most cranial visible part of the ascending aorta was measured. In CTA and MRA the I-I method was used.

RESULTS

Fifty patients with bicuspid aortic valve (36 ± 13 years, 26% female) and 50 Turner patients (35 ± 13 years) were included. Comparison of all aortic measurements showed a mean difference of 5.4 ± 2.7 mm for the SoV, 5.1 ± 2.0 mm for the STJ and 4.8 ± 2.1 mm for the TAA. The maximum difference was 18 mm. The best agreement was found between echocardiography L-L edge and CTA during mid-systole. CTA and MRA showed good agreement. A mean difference of 1.5 ± 1.3 mm and 1.8 ± 1.5 mm was demonstrated at the level of the STJ and TAA comparing mid-systolic with end-diastolic diameters. The visible length of the aorta increased on average 5.3 ± 5.1 mmW during mid-systole.

CONCLUSIONS

MRA and CTA showed best agreement with L-L edge method by echocardiography. In individual patients large differences in ascending aortic diameter were demonstrated, warranting measurement standardization. The use of CTA or MRA is advised at least once.