Key result
Aortic compliance (Ep and β) was not significantly related to abdominal aortic aneurysm growth rate, though larger aneurysms tended to be less compliant (r=0.22, P=0.04 for Ep).
Why the study?
Does aortic compliance correlate with maximal aneurysm diameter and growth rate in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms?
Observational (n=60)
Does aortic compliance correlate with maximal aneurysm diameter and growth rate in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms?
Effect estimate: r = 0.22
p-value: p=0.04
Aortic compliance varies widely among abdominal aortic aneurysms of similar size and does not correlate with aneurysm growth rate, suggesting it may provide independent predictive information for rupture risk.
Compliance measures add no value to AAA growth prediction; leaves open independent role in rupture risk stratification.
Aim: Aortic compliance as measured by the pressure—strain elastic modulus (Ep) and stiffness (β), may allow a more precise estimate of rupture risk. The aim of this study was to determine the relationships between compliance, maximal aneurysm diameter and growth rate. Methods: Sixty abdominal aortic aneurysm patients of median age 73 years, were studied. Growth rate was derived from repeat ultrasound scans obtained over a median period of 21 months (range 6–48). At the end of follow-up, patients underwent measurement of maximum aortic diameter, Ep and β using the Diamove echo-tracking system. Results: Growth rate correlated positively ( r = 0.6, P < 0.01) with maximum diameter on entry to the study There was a positive correlation between mean arterial pressure and Ep ( r = 0.3. P = 0.03), but not between mean arterial pressure and β ( r = 0.8, P = 0.61). A positive correlation was found between final maximum diameter and Ep ( r = 0.22, P = 0.04) but not β ( r = 0.16. P = 0.11). There was no significant relationship between growth rate and Ep or β. Conclusion: Large aneurysms tended to be less compliant. Within a population of abdominal aortic aneurysm of similar maximum diameter there was a 10-fold variation in Ep and β. Compliance and growth rate were not related. If aortic compliance is related to risk of rupture then this predictive information is likely to be largely independent of that currently obtained from size and growth rate.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wilson et al. (1999) conducted an observational in abdominal aortic aneurysm (n=60). Aortic compliance (pressure-strain elastic modulus and stiffness) was evaluated on Correlation between final maximum diameter and pressure-strain elastic modulus (Ep) (r = 0.22, p=0.04). Aortic compliance (Ep and β) was not significantly related to abdominal aortic aneurysm growth rate, though larger aneurysms tended to be less compliant (r=0.22, P=0.04 for Ep).