Key result
Magnetic resonance imaging provides comprehensive, non-invasive assessment of chronic aortic dissection, offering unique advantages in quantifying hemodynamics and false lumen thrombosis compared to traditional imaging modalities.
Why the study?
Does MRI provide adequate or superior assessment of chronic aortic dissection compared to traditional imaging modalities?
Systematic Review (n=272)
Does MRI provide adequate or superior assessment of chronic aortic dissection compared to traditional imaging modalities?
MRI is a comprehensive, non-ionizing imaging tool well-suited for serial follow-up of chronic aortic dissection, offering unique advantages in hemodynamic assessment compared to CT and echocardiography.
Supports MRI for serial non-invasive monitoring of chronic aortic dissection; extends evidence on its hemodynamic and thrombosis quantification advantages.
The acute event of thoracic aortic dissection carries with it high mortality and morbidity. Despite optimal initial surgical or medical management strategies, the risk of further complications in the long-term, including aneurysmal dilatation and false lumen (FL) expansion, are not insignificant. Adequate follow-up of such conditions requires dedicated imaging where relevant prognostic indicators are accurately assessed. We perform a systematic review of the literature and report the current evidence for the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in assessment of chronic aortic dissection. We then make a comparison with traditional imaging modalities including computed tomography and echocardiography. We discuss new ways in which MRI may extend existing aortic assessment, including identification of blood-flow dynamics within the TL and FL using phase-contrast imaging.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sherrah et al. (2015) conducted a systematic review in Chronic aortic dissection (n=272). Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) vs. Computed tomography (CT), trans-esophageal echocardiography (TEE), aortography, or intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) was evaluated. Magnetic resonance imaging provides comprehensive, non-invasive assessment of chronic aortic dissection, offering unique advantages in quantifying hemodynamics and false lumen thrombosis compared to traditional imaging modalities.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: