Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Imaging of aortic abnormalities with contrast-enhanced ultrasound. A pictorial comparison with CT

  • Ultrasound
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aortic abnormalities are commonly encountered and may represent a diagnostic challenge in patients with acute or chronic clinical symptoms. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) with low mechanical index (low MI) is a new promising method in the diagnosis and follow-up of pathological aortic lesions. CEUS with SonoVue allows a more rapid and noninvasive diagnosis, especially in critical patients because of its bedside availability. This review compares CEUS findings with those documented on computed tomography angiography (CTA), allowing the reader to appreciate the usefulness of CEUS in this clinical situation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Taylor KJ, Hilland S (1990) Doppler US. Part 1. Basic principles, instrumentation and pitfalls. Radiology 174:297–307

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Winkler P, Hemke K, Mahl M (1990) Major pitfalls in Doppler investigations. Part II. Low flow velocities and color Doppler applications. Pediatr Radiol 20:304–310

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bargellini I, Napoli V, Petruzzi P, Cioni R, Vignali C, Sardella S, Ferrari M, Bartolozzi C (2004) Type II lumbar endoleaks: hemodynamic differentiation by contrast-enhanced ultrasound scanning and influence on aneurysm enlargement after endovascular aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 41:10–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bendick PJ, Bove BG, Long GW, Zelenock GB, Brown OW, Shanley CJ (2003) Efficacy of ultrasound scan contrast agents in the noninvasive follow-up of aortic stent grafts. J Vasc Surg 37:381–385

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Napoli V, Bargellini I, Sardella SG, Petruzzi P, Cioni R, Vignali C, Ferrari M, Bartolozzi C (2004) Abdominal aortic aneurysm: contrast-enhanced US for missed endoleaks after endoluminal repair. Radiology 233:217–225

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Catalano O, Lobianco R, Cusati B, Siani A (2005) Contrast-enhanced sonography for diagnosis of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. AJR 184:423–427

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bauer A, Solbiati L, Weissmann N (2002) Ultrasound imaging with SonoVue: low mechanical index realtime imaging. Acad Radiol 9(Suppl 2):282–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Lencioni R, Cioni D, Bartolozzi C (2002) Tissue harmonic and contrast-specific imaging: back to grey-scale in ultrasound. Eur Radiol 12:151–161

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Phillips PJ, Gardner E (2004) Contrast-agent detection and quantification. Eur Radiol 14(Suppl 8):4–10

    Google Scholar 

  10. Phillips PJ (2001) Contrast pulse sequences (CPS): imaging nonlinear microbubbles. IEEE Ultrasonic Symposium 2:1739–1745

    Google Scholar 

  11. Greis C (2004) Technology overview: SonoVue (Bracco, Milan). Eur Radiol 14(Suppl 8):11–15

    Google Scholar 

  12. Horejs D, Gilbert P, Burstein S, Vogelzang R (1988) Normal aortoiliac diameters by CT. J Comput Assist Tomgr 12:602–603

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Gallagher PJ (1999) Blood vessels. In: Sternber SS (ed) Diagnostic surgical pathology. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 1256–1258

    Google Scholar 

  14. Jeffrey RB, Ralls PW (1996) CT and sonography of the acute abdomen, 2nd edn. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  15. Miller J, Grimes P, Miller J (1999) Case report of an intraperitoneal ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm diagnosed with bedside ultrasonography. Acad Emerg Med 4:661–664

    Google Scholar 

  16. Adam DJ, Bradbury AW, Stuart WP et al (1998) The value of computed tomography in the assessment of suspected ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg 27:431–437

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Bode PJ, Edwards MJ, Kruit MC, van Vugt AB (1999) Sonography in clinical algorithm for early evaluation of 1671 patients with blunt abdominal trauma. AJR 172:905–911

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Hendrickson RG, Dean AJ, Costantino TG (2001) A novel use of ultrasound in pulseless electrical activity: the diagnosis of an acute abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture. AM J Emerg Med 21:141–145

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Miller J, Miller J (1999) Small ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm diagnosed by emergency physician ultrasound. Am J Emerg Med 17:174–175

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Shuman WP, Hastrup W, Kohler TR et al (1988) Suspected leaking abdominal aortic aneurysm: use of sonography in the emergency room. Radiology 168:117–119

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Abbadi AC, Deldime PP, Van Espen D, Simon M, Rosoux P (1998) The spontaneous aortocaval fistula: a complication of the abdominal aortic aneurysm. Case report and review of the literature. J Cardiovasc Surg 39:433–436

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Gilling-Smith GL, Mansfield AO (1991) Spontaneous abdominal arteriovenous fistula: report of eight cases and review of the literature. Br J Surg 78:421–425

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Davidovic LB, Kostic DM, Cvetkovic SD et al (2002) Aorto-caval fistulas. Cardiovasc Surg 10:555–560

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Davis PM, Gloviczki P, Cherry KJ et al (1998) Aorto-caval and ilio-iliac arteriovenous fistulae. Am J Surg 176:115–118

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Ghilardi G, Scorza R, Bartolini E, de Monti M, Longhi F, Ruberti U (1993) Rupture of abdominal aortic aneurysms into major abdominal veins. J Cardiovasc Surg 34:39–47

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Brunkwall J, Länne T, Bergentz SE (1999) Acute renal impairment due to a primary aortocaval fistula is normalised after a successful operation. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 17:191–196

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Reckless JP, McColl T, Taylor GW (1972) Aortocaval fistulae: an uncommon complication of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Br J Surg 59:461–462

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Syme J (1831) Case of spontaneous varicose aneurysm. Edin Med J 36:104–105

    Google Scholar 

  29. Rosenthal D, Atkins CP, Jerrius HS, Clark MD, Matsuura JH (1998) Diagnosis of aortocaval fistula by computed tomography. Ann Vasc Surg 12:86–87

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Farber A, Wagner WH, Cossman DV et al (2002) Isolated dissection of the abdominal aorta: clinical presentation and therapeutic options. J Vasc Surg 36:205–210

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Spittell PC, Spittel J Jr, Joyce JW (1993) Clinical features and differential diagnosis of aortic dissection: experience with 236 cases (1980–1990). Mayo Clin Proc 68:642–651

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Archer AG, Choyke PL, Zeman RK, Green CE, Zuckerman M (1986) Aortic dissection following coronary artery bypass surgery: diagnosis by CT. Cardiovasc Intervet Radiol 9:142–145

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Khan IA, Nair CN (2002) Clinical, diagnostic and management perspectives of aortic dissection. Chest 122:311–328

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Hagan PG, Nienaber CA, Isselbacher EM et al (2000) The International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD): new insights into an old disease. JAMA 283:897–903

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Veith FJ, Baum RA, Ohki T et al (2002) Nature and significance of endoleaks and endotension: summary of opinions expressed in an international conference. J Vasc Surg 35:461–473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Bernhard VM, Mitchell RS, Matsumura JS et al (2002) Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm after endovascular repair. J Vasc Surg 35:1155–1162

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. White GH, May J, Waugh RC, Yu W (1998) Type I and type II endoleaks: a more useful classification for reporting results of endoluminal AAA repair. J Endovasc Surg 5:189–191

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. White GH, May J, Waugh RC, Chaufour X, Yu W (1998) Type III and type IV endoleaks: toward a complete definition of blood flow in the sac after endoluminal AAA repair. J Endovasc Surg 5:305–309

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Thurnher S, Cejna M (2002) Imaging of aortic stent-grafts and endoleaks. Radiol Clin North Am 40:799–833

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Glozarian J, Dussaussois L, Abada HAT et al (1998) Helical CT of aorta after endoluminal stent-graft therapy: value of biphasic acquisition. AJR 171:329–331

    Google Scholar 

  41. D’Audiffret A, Desgranges P, Kobeiter DH, Becquemin JP (2001) Follow-up evaluation of endoluminally treated abdominal aortic aneurysm with duplex ultrasonography: validation with computed tomography. J Vasc Surg 33:42–50

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. McLafferty RB, McCrary BS, Mattos MA et al (2002) The use of color-flow duplex scan for detection of endoleaks. J Vasc Surg 36:100–104

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Greenfield AL, Halpern EJ, Bonn J, Wechsler RJ, Kahn MB (2002) Application of duplex US for characterization of endoleaks in abdominal aortic stent-grafts: report of five cases. Radiology 225:845–851

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. McWilliams RG, Martin J, White D, Gould DA, Rowlands PC, Haycox A et al (2002) Detection of endoleaks with enhanced ultrasound imaging comparison with biphasic computed tomography. J Endovasc Ther 9:170–179

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Thompson MM, Boyle JR, Hartshorn T et al (1998) Comparison of computed tomography and duplex imaging in assessing aortic morphology following endovascular aneurysm repair. Br J Surg 85:346–350

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Clinical Radiology, University of Munich-Grosshadern, Munich, Germany

    D.-A. Clevert, T. Johnson, C. Glaser & M. Reiser

  2. Department of Surgery, Klinikum Grosshadern, University of Munich, Munich, Germany

    M. Stickel, H. O. Steitz, R. Kopp & K. W. Jauch

  3. Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Technische University, Berlin, Germany

    D.-A. Clevert

Authors
  1. D.-A. Clevert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Stickel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. T. Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. C. Glaser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. D.-A. Clevert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. H. O. Steitz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. R. Kopp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. K. W. Jauch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. M. Reiser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D.-A. Clevert.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Clevert, DA., Stickel, M., Johnson, T. et al. Imaging of aortic abnormalities with contrast-enhanced ultrasound. A pictorial comparison with CT. Eur Radiol 17, 2991–3000 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0542-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0542-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation