Echocardiography is our primary imaging modality for screening most cardiac abnormalities but errors in recording and measurement are common and complicate between study comparisons
Thanks for posting this. I am a 66yo white man. in Dec 21 I was told I had a root aneurysm measuring 5.0cm. (I have HBP) In early 2023 I had a CT scan, and the swelling measured 4.9cm. In July 2024 I had another CT scan, and the swelling measured 4.8cm, and the descending part measuring in at 4.1cm (they called it 'ectasia'). It seems my root aneurysm is shrinking! But I'm suspicious of these results, because they may not be measuring it at the same places, with the same degree of care. I wish I didn't have these concerns.
Your case touches on two of the issues I mentioned.
First, the aortic root bulges at the sinuses of Valsalva and 4.0 cm would be normal if that was the measurement. On the other hand if this was above the sinuses and truly measuring the ascending aorta it would be enlarged. Echo reports should state very clearly where these measurements are taken and they should be compared to the normal range for the appropriate site.
Aortic ectasia is another term for enlargement (dilatation) of the aorta
Most experts and guidelines would advise regular follow up of this finding. In this kind of case if stable over many years I would repeat the echo every 2-3 years.
I first had an echo when a new PCP noticed my resting pulse in the office back in my 20s was in the 160s. I told him, as I had been told since I was a teenager, that my feeling of fast pulse was from anxiety. He has shocked no one had ever referred me to a cardiologist. And they did a Holter and echo. I was eventually given the provisional diagnosis of "POTS like" and put on a beta blocker.
They incidentally found my aortic root was 4 cm. I am 6'2" and my weight varies--at the time it was probably 240 lbs.
At the time the cardiologist told me I would need a yearly echo to detect changes in the size.
And that happened for maybe three years. And I was told it was either 4 or 4.1 cm each time.
He then released me back to my PCP (different one), and I've mentioned to my PCP at times that it should maybe be followed up on, but it hasn't.
I believe one of the echo reports used the phrase "aortic ectasia."
I still take the beta blocker. Do you think it's wise to push for follow up echos? I'm now 40.
Thanks for posting this. I am a 66yo white man. in Dec 21 I was told I had a root aneurysm measuring 5.0cm. (I have HBP) In early 2023 I had a CT scan, and the swelling measured 4.9cm. In July 2024 I had another CT scan, and the swelling measured 4.8cm, and the descending part measuring in at 4.1cm (they called it 'ectasia'). It seems my root aneurysm is shrinking! But I'm suspicious of these results, because they may not be measuring it at the same places, with the same degree of care. I wish I didn't have these concerns.
Well written: concise and informative.
Marcus,
Your case touches on two of the issues I mentioned.
First, the aortic root bulges at the sinuses of Valsalva and 4.0 cm would be normal if that was the measurement. On the other hand if this was above the sinuses and truly measuring the ascending aorta it would be enlarged. Echo reports should state very clearly where these measurements are taken and they should be compared to the normal range for the appropriate site.
Second, assuming your 4.0-4.1 cm measurement was the ascending aorta, given your height this may not be of concern. Some studies (https://www.acc.org/latest-in-cardiology/journal-scans/2018/05/11/11/30/height-alone-rather-than-body-surface-area) show that when you index the aortic diameter by height risks are better predicted.
Aortic ectasia is another term for enlargement (dilatation) of the aorta
Most experts and guidelines would advise regular follow up of this finding. In this kind of case if stable over many years I would repeat the echo every 2-3 years.
Dr. P
I first had an echo when a new PCP noticed my resting pulse in the office back in my 20s was in the 160s. I told him, as I had been told since I was a teenager, that my feeling of fast pulse was from anxiety. He has shocked no one had ever referred me to a cardiologist. And they did a Holter and echo. I was eventually given the provisional diagnosis of "POTS like" and put on a beta blocker.
They incidentally found my aortic root was 4 cm. I am 6'2" and my weight varies--at the time it was probably 240 lbs.
At the time the cardiologist told me I would need a yearly echo to detect changes in the size.
And that happened for maybe three years. And I was told it was either 4 or 4.1 cm each time.
He then released me back to my PCP (different one), and I've mentioned to my PCP at times that it should maybe be followed up on, but it hasn't.
I believe one of the echo reports used the phrase "aortic ectasia."
I still take the beta blocker. Do you think it's wise to push for follow up echos? I'm now 40.