Dynamic geometry and wall thickness of the aortic neck of abdominal aortic aneurysms with intravascular ultrasonography.

BACKGROUND It is commonly assumed that the aortic wall deforms uniformly and has uniform wall thickness about the circumference. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the aortic wall motion and thickness in the infrarenal aortic neck of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms who were undergoing endovascular repair (EVAR) and to compare the dynamic measurements of intravascular ultrasonography with the static measurements of computed tomographic angiography (CTA). METHODS A total of 25 patients were evaluated before surgery with CTA and three-dimensional reconstructions on a Vitrea workstation, followed by intraoperative assessment of the proximal aortic neck with intravascular ultrasonography (IVUS) before EVAR. Infrarenal aortic neck dimensions on CTA were obtained at 1-mm intervals, but for the purposes of this study all dimensions on CTA were obtained 1 cm below the lowest renal artery. IVUS analysis of the proximal aortic neck was obtained with a 10-second recorded data loop of aortic wall motion. A Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine viewer was used to view the recorded loop of aortic movement, and each image was captured and then evaluated with a SCION PCI Frame Grabber to determine aortic dimensions and wall thickness. IVUS diameters (250 measurements of each aorta) were recorded through a full continuous cardiac cycle from the epicenter of the lumen (maintaining the left renal vein in its normal anatomic configuration) in an anteroposterior (AP) direction in the area of greatest wall movement and 90 degrees perpendicular to this direction (lateral movement). RESULTS There was significant variation in infrarenal aortic wall movement about the circumference, with 1.7 +/- 0.6 mm (range, 0.6-2.7 mm) displacement in the AP direction and 0.9 +/- 0.5 mm (range, 0.3-1.5 mm) displacement in the lateral direction (P < .001). Aortic wall thickness was greater in the region of increased AP wall motion than in the area of lesser lateral wall motion (2.3 +/- 0.6 mm vs 1.2 +/- 0.3 mm; P < .001). There was no difference between the IVUS and CTA aortic neck measurements (25.5 vs 25.6 mm; not significant) during the midpoint of the cardiac cycle of IVUS. However, at peak systole, IVUS recorded a greater diameter than CTA (26.4 vs 25.6 mm; P < .001), and at end-diastole, IVUS recorded a smaller diameter than CTA (24.7 vs 25.6 mm; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS The infrarenal neck of aortic aneurysms deforms anisotropically during the cardiac cycle. The greatest displacement is in the AP direction and corresponds with a significantly greater wall thickness in this area. The magnitude of cyclic change in aortic diameter can be as high as 11%. Further evaluation of proximal aortic neck wall motion after EVAR is warranted to determine the interaction of various stent designs and the aortic wall.

[1]  Koen L Vincken,et al.  Dynamic magnetic resonance angiography of the aneurysm neck: conformational changes during the cardiac cycle with possible consequences for endograft sizing and future design. , 2006, Journal of vascular surgery.

[2]  Hui Zhu,et al.  Relationship Between the Dynamic Geometry and Wall Thickness of a Human Coronary Artery , 2003, Arteriosclerosis, thrombosis, and vascular biology.

[3]  Mathias Prokop,et al.  Pilot Study of Dynamic Cine CT Angiography for the Evaluation of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: Implications for Endograft Treatment , 2006, Journal of endovascular therapy : an official journal of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists.

[4]  J. Marcus,et al.  Cine MRI Assessment of Aortic Aneurysm Dynamics before and after Endovascular Repair , 2003, Journal of endovascular therapy : an official journal of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists.

[5]  K L Vincken,et al.  Dynamic cine-CT angiography for the evaluation of the thoracic aorta; insight in dynamic changes with implications for thoracic endograft treatment. , 2006, European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery : the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery.

[6]  W. Kübler,et al.  Aortic pressure-diameter relationship assessed by intravascular ultrasound: experimental validation in dogs. , 1999, American journal of physiology. Heart and circulatory physiology.

[7]  A. van der Lugt,et al.  Accurate assessment of abdominal aortic aneurysm with intravascular ultrasound scanning: validation with computed tomographic angiography. , 1999, Journal of vascular surgery.

[8]  Charles A. Taylor,et al.  Measurement of vessel wall strain using cine phase contrast MRI , 2002, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[9]  G. Karniadakis,et al.  Combined effects of pulsatile flow and dynamic curvature on wall shear stress in a coronary artery bifurcation model. , 2005, Journal of biomechanics.

[10]  Cine magnetic resonance imaging study of blood flow and wall motion of the aortic arch. , 1996, Japanese circulation journal.

[11]  Thomas J. R. Hughes,et al.  Finite Element Modeling of Three-Dimensional Pulsatile Flow in the Abdominal Aorta: Relevance to Atherosclerosis , 2004, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[12]  Rodney A. White,et al.  Intravascular ultrasound: the ultimate tool for abdominal aortic aneurysm assessment and endovascular graft delivery. , 1997 .

[13]  Aorta wall motion monitoring by 1‐d MRI of perpendicular diameters , 1999, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[14]  C. Kleinstreuer,et al.  Computational analysis of biomechanical contributors to possible endovascular graft failure , 2005, Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology.

[15]  P Boesiger,et al.  Distribution of early atherosclerotic lesions in the human abdominal aorta correlates with wall shear stresses measured in vivo. , 1999, European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery : the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery.

[16]  R Greene,et al.  Pulsatile flow simulation in arterial vascular segments with intravascular ultrasound images. , 2001, Medical engineering & physics.

[17]  Charles A. Taylor,et al.  Quantification of Vessel Wall Cyclic Strain Using Cine Phase Contrast Magnetic Resonance Imaging , 2002, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[18]  Michael Markl,et al.  Quantification of vessel wall motion and cyclic strain using cine phase contrast MRI: In vivo validation in the porcine aorta , 2004, Magnetic resonance in medicine.