Aortic dissection aortography
|
Aortic dissection Microchapters |
|
Diagnosis |
|---|
|
Treatment |
|
Special Scenarios |
|
Case Studies |
|
|
Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]; Associate Editor-In-Chief: Cafer Zorkun, M.D., Ph.D. [2]
Overview
Other Imaging Findings
Aortogram
The aortogram was previously considered the gold standard test for the diagnosis of aortic dissection, with a sensitivity of up to 88% and a specificity of about 94%. It is especially poor in the diagnosis of cases where the dissection is due to hemorrhage within the media without any initiating intimal tear.
The advantage of the aortogram in the diagnosis of aortic dissection is that it can delineate the extent of involvement of the aorta and branch vessels and can diagnose aortic insufficiency.
The disadvantages of the aortogram are that it is an invasive procedure and it requires the use of iodinated contrast material.
Although aortography has a sensitivity of 88% and a specificity of 94% in experienced hands, it has largely been replaced by noninvasive diagnostic techniques. It is helpful however, in determining the site of dissection, the relationship of the dissection the major aortic branches, as well as identifying the true and false lumens. Additionally, coronary angiography can be preformed at the same time. False negatives occur if the false leumen is already thrombosed, or when there is simultaneous opacification of both lumens.
{{#ev:googlevideo|1291385681032114503}}
Aorta: Dissection, Cystic Medial Degeneration
{{#ev:youtube|t9WVLNi7zXk}}