Result card

  • TEC15: Are the reference values or cut-off points for the diagnosis of AAA by the golden standard technical device clearly established?
Abdominal Aorta Aneurysm Screening
B0018
English
No adaptation help available for this domain

Are the reference values or cut-off points for the diagnosis of AAA by the golden standard technical device clearly established?

Authors: Daniela Pertl, Sophie Brunner-Ziegler

Internal reviewers: Pseudo110 Pseudo110, Pseudo71 Pseudo71

By definition, the size of the abdominal aorta is considered normal if it does not exceed 2.5 cm as measured by ultrasound. Enlargement of abdominal aortic diameter to 2.5 cm or more is diagnosed as “Ectasia” (2.5 cm–3 cm) and to more than 3 cm as “Aneurysm” (13). Regarding the reliability and reproducibility of inner to inner diameter (excluding the arterial wall; ITI) versus outer to outer diameter (including the arterial wall; OTO) ultrasound measurement of AAA diameter, it is assumed, that the ITI wall method is more reproducible. {22}

To assess the rupture risk of an AAA, however, more reliable parameters than diameter are peak wall stress and peak wall rupture risk. {33}

Critical
Completely
Pertl D, Brunner-Ziegler S Result Card TEC15 In: Pertl D, Brunner-Ziegler S Description and technical characteristics of technology In: Jefferson T, Vicari N, Frønsdal K [eds.]. Abdominal Aorta Aneurysm Screening [Core HTA], Agenzia nationale per i servizi sanitari regionali (age.na.s), Italy; 2013. [cited 28 May 2023]. Available from: http://corehta.info/ViewCover.aspx?id=106

References

  • {22}  Hartshorne TC, McCollum CN, Earnshaw JJ, Morris J, Nasim A. Ultrasound measurement of aortic diameter in a national screening programme. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2011;42:199.
  • {33}  Fillinger MF. MS, Raghavan ML., Kennedy FE. Prediction of rupture risk in abdominal aortic aneurysm during observation: wall stress versus diameter. Journal of Vascular Surgery. 2003;37 (4):732.