Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Computed Tomographic Analysis of Aortic Arch Branching Patterns: Revisited

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
SN Comprehensive Clinical Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Branching pattern of aortic arch (AA) has a direct impact on the outcomes of thoracic surgical and angiographic procedures. Since, geographical variations in the branching pattern of AA have been described, this descriptive cross-sectional study describes the AA variations in a Sri Lankan population compared to the available global data. For that, contrast-enhanced computed tomographic studies (CTC) of thorax (n = 219) performed in males (49.3%) and females (50.7%), aged 59 ± 17 years (range: 4 to 96 years), were evaluated. Branching patterns of AA were categorized into seven types as described by Popieluszko et al. Only, four AA types were identified in the study population: type 1 (90%; n = 197), type 2 (n = 10, 4.6%), type 3 (n = 8, 3.7%), and type 6 AA (n = 4; 1.8%). The prevalence of AA variations was 10%. Type 1 AA was the most prevalent pattern in both genders: female, 91%; males, 88.9%. The most prevalent AA variant in females was type 2 (n = 6; 5.4%); males type 3 (n = 5; 4.6%). However, the branching pattern of AA has not demonstrated a significant gender influence (odds: 0.792; 95% CI: 0.327–1.917; p = 0.605). Variations in branching pattern of AA are as high as 10% among Sri Lankans. Thus, an in-depth knowledge on population specific prevalence of AA variants would influence the modifications of surgical approaches and the choice of angiographic catheters to be utilized, which in turn would minimize inadvertent vascular injuries during thoracic surgical and angiographic interventions.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

Data will be published in Mendeley.

Code Availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. Priya S, Thomas R, Nagpal P, Sharma A, Steigner M. Congenital anomalies of the aortic arch. Cardiovasc Diagn Ther. 2018;8:S26–44. https://doi.org/10.21037/cdt.2017.10.15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Sadler TW. Langman medical embryology. 14th ed. USA: Walters Kluwer; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Schoenwolf GC, Bleyl SB, Brauer PR, Francis-West PH, Philippa H. Larsen’s human embryology. 5th ed. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Balaban Y. Effectiveness of a handmade “NEW CAROTID CATHETER” in trans radial carotid angiography : a comparison with conventional multipurpose catheters. J Interv Cardiol. 2018;31:94–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/joic.12454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ahn SH, Prince EA, Dubel GJ. Basic Neuroangiography : review of technique and perioperative patient care. Semin intervent Radiol. 2013;212:225–33.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Knox JA, Alexander MD, McCoy DB, Murph DC, Hinkly PJ, Chang JC, et al. Impact of aortic arch anatomy on technical performance and clinical outcomes in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Am J Neuroradiol. 2020;41:268–673.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Popieluszko P, Henry M, Sanna B, Hsieh C. A systematic review and meta-analysis of variations in branching patterns of the adult aortic arch. J Vasc Surg. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2017.06.097.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Poyyamoli S, Swamiappan E, Gandhi J, Ranasingh RK, Cherian MP, Mehta P. Non-aortic vascular findings on chest CT angiogram: including arch vessels and bronchial arteries. Cardiovasc Diagn Ther. 2019;9:S59–73. https://doi.org/10.21037/cdt.2018.09.05.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Diehm N, Herrmann P, Dinkel HP. Multi detector CT angiography versus digital subtraction angiography for aortoiliac length measurements prior to endovascular AAA repair. J Endovasc Ther. 2004;11:527–34. https://doi.org/10.1583/03-1172.1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Budhiraja V, Rastogi R, Jain V, Bankwar V, Raghuwanshi S. Anatomical variations in the branching pattern of human aortic arch : a cadaveric study from Central India. ISRN Anatomy. 2013: 828969 https://doi.org/10.5402/2013/828969

  11. Qiu Y, Wu X, Zhuang Z, Li X, Zhu L, Huang C, et al. Anatomical variations of the aortic arch branches in a sample of Chinese cadavers: embryological basis and literature review. Interact CardioVasc Thorac Surg. 2019;28:622–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lale P, Toprak U, J GY, Kaya T, Sad J, Uyan A. Variations in the branching pattern of the aortic arch detected with computerized tomography angiography. Advances in Radiology. 2014:969728. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/969728

  13. Keet K, Gunston G, Alexander R. Variations in the branching pattern of the aortic arch: an African perspective. Eur J Anat. 2019;23:91–102.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Wang L, Zhang J, Xin S. Morphologic features of the aortic arch and its branches in the adult Chinese population. J Vasc Surg. 2016;6:1602-1608.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2016.05.092.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Mylonas SN. Prevalence of bovine aortic arch variant in patients with aortic dissection and its implications in the outcome of patients with acute type b aortic dissection. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2018;55:385–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2017.12.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Nayak SR, Pai MM, Prabhu LV, D’Costa S, Shetty P. Anatomical organization of aortic arch variations in the India: embryological basis and review. J Vasc Bras. 2006;5:95–100. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1677-54492006000200004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kondori JB, Asadi MH, Rahimian E, Tahsini MR. Anatomical variations in aortic arch branching pattern. Arch Iran Med. 2016;19:72–4.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Arazinska A, Polguj M, Szymczyk K, Kaczmarska M, Trebinski Ł, Stefańczyk L. Right aortic arch analysis – anatomical variant or serious vascular defect? BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2017;17:102. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12872-017-0536-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Pandian DK, Radha K, Sundaravadhanam KVK. Study on branching pattern of arch of aorta in south Indian population. Int J Anat Res. 2014;2:673–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Rekha P, Senthikumar S. A study on branching pattern of human aortic arch and its variations in south Indian population. J Morphol Sci. 2013;30:11–5.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Tayal R, Khakwani MZ, Lesar B, Sinclair M, Emporelli A, Spektor V, et al. Takeoff orientation of the major aortic arch branches irrespective of arch type : ramifications for brachiocephalic interventions including carotid stenting. Sage Open Med. 2018;6:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050312118776717.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hanneman K, Newman B. Congenital variants and anomalies of the aortic arch. Radiographics. 2017;37:32–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Karacan A, Türkvatan A, Karacan K. Anatomical variations of aortic arch branching: evaluation with computed tomographic angiography. Cardiol Young. 2014;24:485–93. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1047951113000656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Molz G. Aberrant right subclavian arteries: predominance in females. Basic Res Cardiol. 1976;71:420–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Crowhurst JA, Whitby M, Thiele D, Halligan T, Westerink A, Crown S, Jillian M. Radiation dose in coronary angiography and intervention: initial results from the establishment of a multi-centre diagnostic reference level in Queensland public hospitals. J Med Radiat Sci. 2014;61:135–41. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Self-funded.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

I Kodikara: Project development, data management, data analysis, manuscript writing and editing.

D Gamage: study design, data collection, data analysis.

S de Soyza: data collection, manuscript editing.

I Ilayperuma: project supervision, manuscript editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Iroshani Kodikara.

Ethics declarations

Ethics Approval

Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the Ethical Review Committee of Kotelawala Defense University of Sri Lanka (RP/2018/13).

Consent to Participate

Not applicable in this retrospective study.

Consent for Publication

Not applicable.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Imaging

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (PDF 37 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kodikara, I., Gamage, D., De Soyza, S. et al. Computed Tomographic Analysis of Aortic Arch Branching Patterns: Revisited. SN Compr. Clin. Med. 4, 17 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42399-021-01112-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42399-021-01112-x

Keywords

Navigation