Comparison of abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter measurements obtained with ultrasound and computed tomography: is there a difference?

Abstract

Maximal AAA diameter measured with CT is significantly and consistently larger than maximal AAA diameter measured with US. The clinical significance of this difference and its cause remains a subject for further investigation.

Thoracic and Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

“…It is important to note that CT measurements of aneurysm size tend to be larger than ultrasound measurements by a mean of 3 to 9 mm, according to the aneurysm size. 41,42 CT angiography (3-dimensional display of the aorta and its branches) is particularly useful, in that it provides more comprehensive evaluation of the anatomy of both the abdominal aortic aneurysm and the renal, mesenteric, and iliac arteries ( Figure 11). In those in whom contrast-enhanced CT scanning is contraindicated (eg, renal insufficiency or allergy), MR angiography is an alternative for the comprehensive evaluation of aortic aneurysms.…”

Axial computed tomography and duplex scanning for the determination of maximal abdominal aortic diameter in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms

“…The duplex scan has emerged as the most practical method for the screening and follow-up of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms, while computed tomography is considered to be the gold standard. Several authors have noted a difference between abdominal aortic diameter measurements obtained with duplex ultrasound and those obtained with computed tomography [8][9][10][11][12][13][14]. Despite frequently noted discrepancies, these issues have not been adequately addressed in the literature, and in only a few studies has a direct comparison of aortic diameters using duplex and computed tomography been performed [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17].…”

Can We Predict Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm (AAA) Progression and Rupture by Non-Invasive Imaging?—A Systematic Review

“…Recent advances include devices that automatically detect the aortic diameter with a 90% sensitivity without the need for a trained operator [28]. Ultrasound tends to measure AAA diameter slightly smaller than CT scan [29]. The UKSAT showed that patterns of expansion are highly variable.…”

“…The preliminary findings from an observational longi- [23] Routine CT scan for AAA (not done to measure PWS) 30 (AAA < 5.5 cm) patient specific 3D/validated isotropic nonlinear hyperelastic material model [28][29][30][31]  Aim was to assess PWS at maximal systolic blood pressure as a promising technique to detect aneurysm rupture risk.  PWS analysis in asymptomatic, symptomatic and ruptured AAA (10 patients per group).…”