Key result
Patients with Marfan syndrome had significantly greater mean aortic volume than healthy controls (104 vs 74 mL/m2; P<0.001), which increased significantly over 3 years of follow-up.
Why the study?
Does contrast-enhanced MRI assessment of aortic volume provide reproducible estimates and detect aortic expansion more effectively than diameter in patients with Marfan syndrome?
Observational (n=88)
Does contrast-enhanced MRI assessment of aortic volume provide reproducible estimates and detect aortic expansion more effectively than diameter in patients with Marfan syndrome?
Absolute Event Rate: 104% vs 74%
p-value: p=< .001
Aortic volume assessment by MRI is highly reproducible and more sensitive than diameter measurements for detecting aortic expansion over time in patients with Marfan syndrome.
Aortic volume by MRI may enhance expansion monitoring in Marfan syndrome; leaves open superiority to diameter for outcomes.
Purpose To assess the reproducibility of aortic volume estimates and to serially test their use in patients with Marfan syndrome. Materials and Methods The study was approved by the medical ethics committee and all subjects gave written informed consent. In 81 patients with Marfan syndrome and seven healthy control subjects, aortic volumes and diameters at baseline were estimated by means of contrast material–enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging. At 3 years of follow-up, aortic expansion rate were calculated in a subgroup of 22 patients with Marfan syndrome. Total aortic volume was defined as volume measurement from the level of the aortic annulus to the aortic bifurcation. Intra- and interobserver agreement of aortic volume were calculated by using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Differences in variables were analyzed with the Student t test and logistic regression. Effect size was calculated. Results Intra- and interobserver agreement of aortic volume calculation was 0.996 and 0.980, respectively. Mean aortic volume was significantly greater in patients with Marfan syndrome than in control subjects (104 mL/m2; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 95, 114 mL/m2 vs 74 mL/m2; 95% CI: 62, 87 mL/m2; P < .001). In 22 patients with Marfan syndrome, mean aortic volume was increased at 3 years of follow-up (17 mL; 95% CI: 8, 26 mL; P = .001; effect size, 0.29), while mean aortic diameter did not increase significantly (0.4 mm; 95% CI: 0.0, 0.9 mm; P = .171; effect size, 0.13). Conclusion Assessment of aortic volume is highly reproducible and may be suited for use in the detection of aortic expansion in patients with Marfan syndrome.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hartog et al. (2013) conducted an observational in Marfan syndrome (n=88). Marfan syndrome vs. Healthy control subjects was evaluated on Mean aortic volume (p=< .001). Patients with Marfan syndrome had significantly greater mean aortic volume than healthy controls (104 vs 74 mL/m2; P<0.001), which increased significantly over 3 years of follow-up.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: