Comparison of ultrasonography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging with intraoperative measurements in the evaluation of abdominal aortic aneurysms.
OBJECTIVE
To study the imaging exams more commonly used for abdominal aortic aneurysms evaluation - ultrasonography, conventional computerized tomography, helical computerized tomography and nuclear magnetic angioresonance - comparing the preoperative measurements reached by those radiological methods with the measurements made during the surgical procedures.


METHODS
Patients who had indication of elective transperitoneal surgical treatment for their abdominal aortic aneurysms were included in the study. The initial diagnosis of the aortic dilatation was made by ultrasonography and, after the surgical treatment was indicated, the patient was submitted to another imaging method. Sixty patients were divided into 3 groups according to the complementary imaging method (conventional computerised tomography, helical computerized tomography, nuclear magnetic angioresonance). The ultrasonography of the first 20 patients were joined in a fourth group. There were considered in the study the measurements of the transversal diameter of the proximal neck, maximum transversal diameter of the aneurysm, straight-line length and transversal diameter of the common iliac arteries given by the imaging methods. The same measurements were made by using a caliper during the surgical procedure, and then compared to the values obtained from the radiological exams.


RESULTS
The maximum transverse diameter had a range measurement variation of 4.5 to 13.6 cm in the intraoperative, with no statistically significant differences when compared with all the imaging tests. The ultrasonography, however, overestimated the measurements of the proximal neck and the common iliac arteries, in comparison with intraoperative measures. The length of the aorta aneurysm obtained by the conventional computerized tomography was significantly lower if compared to the measures done with the calliper during the operation. The helical computerized tomography and the nuclear magnetic angioresonance provided measurements with no significant differences in the statistic view when compared to the intraoperative measures.


CONCLUSIONS
Ultrasonography is a reliable method for the diagnosis and follow-up of the aorta abdominal aneurysms, but insufficient for endovascular surgery planning. The conventional computed tomography can provoke distortion in the length measurements of the aorta dilatation. Helical computed tomography and nuclear magnetic angioresonance provided precise measurements of all the studied parameters, being of great utility for surgical planning.
das Chagas de Azevedo
Francisco
F
Hospital das Clínicas, Faculty of Medicine, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Zerati
Antonio Eduardo
AE
Blasbalg
Roberto
R
Wolosker
Nelson
N
Puech-Leão
Pedro
P
D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D017544:Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000601:surgery; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007430:Intraoperative Care; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging / Q000592:standards*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011300:Preoperative Care; D018709:Statistics, Nonparametric; D036542:Tomography, Spiral Computed / Q000592:standards; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed / Q000592:standards*; D014463:Ultrasonography / Q000592:standards*