This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kaji, S. Articles by Yoshida, K. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kaji, S. Articles by Yoshida, K. Related Collections Risk Factors Other etiology CT and MRI

(Circulation. 1999;100:II-281.)
© 1999 American Heart Association, Inc.

Aortic and Peripheral Vascular Surgery

Prediction of Progression or Regression of Type A Aortic Intramural Hematoma by Computed Tomography

Shuichiro Kaji, MD; Kazuhiro Nishigami, MD; Takashi Akasaka, MD; Takeshi Hozumi, MD; Tsutomu Takagi, MD; Takahiro Kawamoto, MD; Hiroyuki Okura, MD; Hiroyuki Shono, MD; Yoko Horibata, MD; Takashi Honda, MD; Kiyoshi Yoshida, MD

From the Division of Cardiology (S.K., T.A., T. Hozumi, T.T., T.K., H.O., K.Y.), Kobe General Hospital, Kobe, Japan, and the Division of Cardiology (K.N., H.S., Y.H., T. Honda), Saiseikai Kumamoto Hospital, Kumamoto, Japan.

Correspondence to Kiyoshi Yoshida, MD, Cardiovascular Medicine, Kawasaki Medical School, 577 Matsushima, Kurashiki, Okayama, Japan 701-0192. E-mail kyoshida{at}med.kawasaki-m.ac.jp

Background—It has been reported that early surgery should be required for patients with type A aortic intramural hematoma (IMH) because it tends to develop classic aortic dissection or rupture. However, the anatomic features of type A IMH that develops dissection or rupture are unknown. The purpose of this study was to investigate the predictors of progression or regression of type A IMH by computed tomography (CT).

Methods and Results—Twenty-two consecutive patients with type A IMH were studied by serial CT images. Aortic diameter and aortic wall thickness of the ascending aorta were estimated in CT images at 3 levels on admission and at follow-up (mean 37 days). We defined patients who showed increased maximum aortic wall thickness in the follow-up CT (n=9) or died of rupture (n=1) as the progression group (n=10). The other 12 patients, who all showed decreased maximum wall thickness, were categorized as the regression group. In the progression group, the maximum aortic diameter in the initial CT was significantly greater than that in the regression group (55±6 vs 47±3 mm, P=0.001). A Cox regression analysis revealed that the maximum aortic diameter was the strongest predictor for progression of type A IMH. We considered the optimal cutoff value to be 50 mm for the maximum aortic diameter to predict progression (positive predictive value 83%, negative predictive value 100%).

Conclusions—Maximum aortic diameter estimated by the initial CT images is predictive for progression of type A IMH.

Key Words: aorta • follow-up studies • risk factors • tomography