Aortic dissections originating in the ascending aorta and descending aorta have been classified as type A and type B dissections, respectively. However, dissections with intimal flap extension into the aortic arch between the innominate and left subclavian arteries are not accounted for adequately in the widely used Stanford classification. This gap has been the subject of controversy in the medical and surgical literature, and there is a tendency among many radiologists to categorize such arch dissections as type A lesions, thus making them an indication for surgery. However, the radiologic perspective is not supported by either standard dissection classification or current clinical management. In this special report, the origin of dissection classification and its evolution into current radiologic interpretation and surgical practice are reviewed. The cause for the widespread misconception about classification and treatment algorithms is identified. Institutional review board approval and waiver of informed consent were obtained as part of this HIPAA-compliant retrospective study to assess all aortic dissection studies performed at the University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore between 2010 and 2012 to determine the prevalence of arch dissections. Finally, a unified classification system that reconciles imaging interpretation and management implementation is proposed.
Purpose To compare the diagnostic yield and complication rates of electromagnetic navigational bronchoscopic (ENB)-guided and computed tomography (CT)-guided percutaneous tissue sampling of lung nodules. Materials and Methods Retrospectively identified were 149 patients sampled percutaneously with CT guidance and 146 patients who underwent ENB with transbronchial biopsy of a lung lesion between 2013 and 2015. Clinical data, incidence of complications, and nodule pathologic analyses were assessed through electronic medical record review. Lung nodule characteristics were reviewed through direct image analysis. Molecular marker studies and pathologic analyses from surgical excision were reviewed when available. Multiple-variable logistic regression models were built to compare the diagnostic yield and complication rates for each method and for different patient and disease characteristics. Results CT-guided sampling was more likely to be diagnostic than ENB-guided biopsy (86.0% [129 of 150] vs 66.0% [99 of 150], respectively), and this difference remained significant even after adjustments were made for patient and nodule characteristics (P < .001). Age, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, emphysema grade, nodule size, and distance from pleura were not significant predictors of increased diagnostic yield. Intraprocedural time for physicians was significantly lower with CT-guided sampling (P < .001). Similar yield for molecular analyses was noted with the two approaches (ENB-guided sampling, 88.9% [32 of 36]; CT-guided sampling, 82.0% [41 of 50]). The two groups had similar rates of major complications (symptomatic hemorrhage, P > .999; pneumothorax requiring chest tube and/or admission, P = .417). Conclusion CT-guided transthoracic biopsy provided higher diagnostic yield in the assessment of peripheral pulmonary nodules than navigational bronchoscopy with a similar rate of clinically relevant complications. RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.
Summary The NIH/NHLBI launched an initiative, “Redefining Pulmonary Hypertension through Pulmonary Vascular Disease Phenomics (PVDOMICS)” that aims to augment the current PH classification based on shared biological features. PVDOMICS will enroll 1,500 participants with PH and disease and healthy comparators. Enrollees will undergo deep clinical phenotyping and blood will be acquired for comprehensive “omic” analyses that will focus on discovery of molecular-based subtypes of PVD through application of high dimensional model-based clustering methods. In addition to an updated, molecular classification of PVD, the phenomic data generated will be a rich resource to the broad community of heart and lung disease investigators.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.