Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
We thank Sahu et al. for their interest in our article.1 The descriptive outline of an aortic intramural hematoma (IMH) they provide points to additional nuances in our own described case.2
The finding of an overlaying ulcer associated with an IMH highlights the uncertainty as to whether the ulcer is the cause or the result of the IMH. The clinical setting, site of aortic involvement, and information obtained from multimodal imaging provide some clues to the answer. Our case revealed an ulcer in the distal aortic arch in association with an IMH in a patient with a clear history of atherosclerotic disease (i.e., both coronary and peripheral vascular disease) suggesting a penetrating aortic ulcer (PAU) as the cause of IMH. However, Sahu et al. describe ulcer-like projections (ULPs) as a potential differential diagnosis in an IMH setting and highlight that the visualisation of ULPs in the ascending aorta may be a consequence of the hematoma expansion itself.
Despite the echocardiographic finding of an ulcer in the proximal aorta (which itself is an uncommon site for PAUs), the possibility of a microtear after a recent coronary intervention and the presence of contrast-filled pouchings into a thickened aortic wall on the initial computed tomography (CT) scan favoured the diagnosis of PAU with an IMH. In contrast, ULPs are usually absent on an initial CT scan and lack any atherosclerotic association.
It is also important to consider the often progressive course of these aortic mixed lesions such as PAU with IMH3 or ULPs with IMH,4 which points to the importance of carefully characterizing these lesions and stratifying their related risk. For instance, a high risk of rupture is described with the rather rare incidence of PAUs in the aortic arch,5 necessitating an urgent surgical intervention, as in the index case.
To conclude, an aortic ulcer is frequently appreciated in the setting of non-communicating dissections and advanced imaging modalities can allow for a better understanding of the causative and prognostic implications.
References
Sahu KK, Lal A, Mishra AK. Additional insights regarding aortic intramural hematoma. Can J Anesth 2020; 67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-019-01490-w.
Makhija N, Magoon R. Sarkar S. Transesophageal echocardiographic imaging of an aortic intramural hematoma: characterizing the crescent. Can J Anesth 2019; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-019-01456-y.
Ganaha F, Miller DC, Sugimoto K, et al. Prognosis of aortic intramural hematoma with and without penetrating atherosclerotic ulcer: a clinical and radiological analysis. Circulation 2002; 106: 342-8.
Kitai T, Kaji S, Yamamuro A, et al. Impact of new development of ulcer-like projection on clinical outcomes in patients with type B aortic dissection with closed and thrombosed false lumen. Circulation 2010; 122(11 Suppl): S74-80.
Hussain S, Glover JL, Bree R, Benedick PJ. Penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers of the thoracic aorta. J Vasc Surg 1989; 9: 710-7.
Conflicts of interest
None declared.
Editorial responsibility
This submission was handled by Dr. Hilary P. Grocott, Editor-in-Chief, Canadian Journal of Anesthesia.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Makhija, N., Magoon, R. & Goyal, A. In reply: Additional insights regarding aortic intramural hematoma. Can J Anesth/J Can Anesth 67, 384 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-019-01491-9
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-019-01491-9