16
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Intramural haematoma of the thoracic aorta: who's to be alerted the cardiologist or the cardiac surgeon?

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This review article is written so as to present the pathophysiology, the symptomatology and the ways of diagnosis and treatment of a rather rare aortic disease called Intra-Mural Haematoma (IMH). Intramural haematoma is a quite uncommon but potentially lethal aortic disease that can strike as a primary occurrence in hypertensive and atherosclerotic patients to whom there is spontaneous bleeding from vasa vasorum into the aortic wall (media) or less frequently, as the evolution of a penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer (PAU). IMH displays a typical of dissection progress, and could be considered as a precursor of classic aortic dissection. IMH enfeebles the aortic wall and may progress to either outward rupture of the aorta or inward disruption of the intima layer, which ultimately results in aortic dissection. Chest and back acute penetrating pain is the most commonly noticed symptom at patients with IMH. Apart from a transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), a tomographic imaging such as a chest computed tomography (CT), a magnetic resonance (MRI) and most lately a multy detector computed tomography (MDCT) can ensure a quick and accurate diagnosis of IMH. Similar to type A and B aortic dissection, surgery is indicated at patients with type-A IMH, as well as at patients with a persistent and/or recurrent pain. For any other patient (with type-B IMH without an incessant pain and/or without complications), medical treatment is suggested, as applied in the case of aortic dissection. The outcome of IMH in ascending aorta (type A) appears favourable after immediate (emergent or urgent) surgical intervention, but according to international bibliography patients with IMH of the descending aorta (type B) show similar mortality rates to those being subjected to conservative medical or surgical treatment. Endovascular surgery and stent-graft placement is currently indicated in type B IMH.

          Related collections

          Most cited references53

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Epidemiology and clinicopathology of aortic dissection.

          To determine the incidence and mortality as well as to analyze the clinical and pathologic changes of aortic dissection. A population-based longitudinal study over 27 years on a study population of 106,500, including 66 hospitalized and 18 nonhospitalized consecutively observed patients. Analysis of data from the medical, surgical, and autopsy records of patients with aortic dissection. Altogether, 86 cases of aortic dissection were found in 84 patients, corresponding to a 2.9/100,000/yr incidence. Sixty-six of the 84 patients (79%) were admitted to the hospital, and 18 patients (21%) died before admission. Their ages ranged from 36 to 97 years, with a mean of 65. 7 years. The male/female ratio was 1.55 to 1. A total of 22.7% of the hospitalized patients died within the first 6 h, 33.3% within 12 h, 50% within 24 h, and 68.2% within the first 2 days after admission. Six patients were operated on, with a perioperative mortality of two of six patients and a 5-year survival of two of six patients. All patients who were not operated on died. Pain was the most frequent initial symptom. Every patient had some kind of cardiovascular and respiratory sign. Neurologic symptoms occurred in 28 of 66 patients (42%). Five patients presented with clinical pictures of acute abdomen and two with acute renal failure. Trunk arteries were affected in 33 of the 80 autopsied cases (41%), and rupture of aorta was seen in 69 cases (86%). In five cases, spontaneous healing of dissection was also found. The ratio of proximal/distal dissections was 5.1 to 1. All 18 prehospital cases were acute. Fifty-nine cases (89.4%) were acute at admission, and 7 cases (10.6%) were chronic dissections. Hypertension and advanced age were the major predisposing factors. Aortic dissection was the initial clinical impression in only 13 of the 84 patients (15%). Thus, 85% of the patients did not receive immediate appropriate medical treatment. For this reason, these late-recognized and/or unrecognized cases may be regarded as an untreated or symptomatically treated group, whose course may resemble the natural course of aortic dissection.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Diagnosis and management of aortic dissection.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Risk factors for aortic dissection: a necropsy study of 161 cases.

              Among 161 necropsy cases of aortic dissection, 87 (54%) were type I, 34 (21%) type II, and 40 (25%) type III, and an intimal tear was identified in each. Systemic hypertension had been present in 63 of 121 cases (52%) with type I or II dissection and in 30 of 40 (75%) with type III dissection. Aortic dissection involved 7 of 16 cases (44%) with the Marfan syndrome. In the 154 cases without the Marfan syndrome, grade 3 or 4 medial degeneration (cystic medial necrosis) was observed in the ascending aorta in only 27 (18%). The risk of aortic dissection in persons with congenitally bicuspid and unicommissural aortic valves, respectively, was 9 and 18 times that in subjects with tricuspid aortic valves. The mean age of those with aortic dissection and tricuspid, bicuspid and unicommissural aortic valves was 63, 55 and 40 years, respectively, and aortic dissection was more common in men than in women. Grade 3 or 4 atherosclerosis involved the intimal tear in only 11 of 121 type I or II dissections (9%) but 32 of 40 type III dissections (80%). Accordingly, the major risk factors for aortic dissection were systemic hypertension, the Marfan syndrome, and, for type I and II dissections, congenitally bicuspid or unicommissural aortic valves. Aortic medial degeneration was a less important risk factor. Rupture of ulcerocalcific aortic atheromas may have initiated the intimal tear in some type III dissections.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Cardiothorac Surg
                Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
                BioMed Central
                1749-8090
                2009
                1 October 2009
                : 4
                : 54
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Cardio-thoracic Surgery Department, University Hospital of Patras, School of Medicine, Patras, Greece
                [2 ]Cardiac Surgery Department, University Hospital of Ioannina, School of Medicine, Ioannina, Greece
                [3 ]Department of Clinical Anaesthesiology and Intensive Postoperative Care Unit, University Hospital of Ioannina, School of Medicine, Ioannina, Greece
                [4 ]Department of Cardiology, University Hospital of Ioannina, School of Medicine, Ioannina, Greece
                Article
                1749-8090-4-54
                10.1186/1749-8090-4-54
                2761381
                19793400
                3cbb5b9a-369d-486b-946a-14c8814db679
                Copyright © 2009 Baikoussis et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 11 May 2009
                : 1 October 2009
                Categories
                Review

                Surgery
                Surgery

                Comments

                Comment on this article