Annika Syperek1, Anselm Angermaier2, Marie-Luise Kromrey3, Norbert Hosten3, Michael Kirsch3. 1. Institute for Diagnostic Radiology and Neuroradiology, Greifswald University Hospital, Ferdinand-Sauerbruch-Straße, 17475, Greifswald, Germany. as133837@uni-greifswald.de. 2. Department of Neurology, Greifswald University Hospital, Greifswald, Germany. 3. Institute for Diagnostic Radiology and Neuroradiology, Greifswald University Hospital, Ferdinand-Sauerbruch-Straße, 17475, Greifswald, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine the prevalence of the so-called bovine aortic arch variation (common origin of the brachiocephalic trunk and the left common carotid artery) in embolic stroke patients, compared with a control group. METHODS: Aortic arch branching patterns were retrospectively evaluated in 474 individuals with (n = 152) and without (n = 322) acute embolic stroke of the anterior circulation. Contrast-enhanced CT scans of the chest and neck (arterial contrast phase, 1-2-mm slice thickness) were used to evaluate aortic arch anatomy. The stroke cohort included 152 patients who were treated for embolic strokes of the anterior circulation between 2008 and 2018. A total of 322 randomly selected patients who had received thoracic CT angiographies within the same time frame were included as a control group. RESULTS: With a prevalence of 25.7%, the bovine aortic arch variant was significantly more common among patients suffering from embolic strokes, compared with 17.1% of control patients (p = 0.039, OR = 1.67, 95%CI = 1.05-1.97). Stroke patients were more likely to show the bovine arch subtype B (left common carotid artery originating from the brachiocephalic trunk instead of the aortic arch) (10.5% vs. 5.0%, p = 0.039, OR = 2.25, 95%CI = 1.09-4.63), while subtype A (V-shaped common aortic origin of the brachiocephalic trunk and the left carotid) was similarly common in both groups. There was no significant difference regarding the frequency of other commonly observed variant branching patterns of the aortic arch. CONCLUSION: The bovine aortic arch, particularly the bovine arch subtype B, was significantly more common among embolic stroke patients. This might be due to altered hemodynamic properties within the bovine arch.
PURPOSE: To examine the prevalence of the so-called bovine aortic arch variation (common origin of the brachiocephalic trunk and the left common carotid artery) in embolic strokepatients, compared with a control group. METHODS: Aortic arch branching patterns were retrospectively evaluated in 474 individuals with (n = 152) and without (n = 322) acute embolic stroke of the anterior circulation. Contrast-enhanced CT scans of the chest and neck (arterial contrast phase, 1-2-mm slice thickness) were used to evaluate aortic arch anatomy. The stroke cohort included 152 patients who were treated for embolic strokes of the anterior circulation between 2008 and 2018. A total of 322 randomly selected patients who had received thoracic CT angiographies within the same time frame were included as a control group. RESULTS: With a prevalence of 25.7%, the bovine aortic arch variant was significantly more common among patients suffering from embolic strokes, compared with 17.1% of control patients (p = 0.039, OR = 1.67, 95%CI = 1.05-1.97). Strokepatients were more likely to show the bovine arch subtype B (left common carotid artery originating from the brachiocephalic trunk instead of the aortic arch) (10.5% vs. 5.0%, p = 0.039, OR = 2.25, 95%CI = 1.09-4.63), while subtype A (V-shaped common aortic origin of the brachiocephalic trunk and the left carotid) was similarly common in both groups. There was no significant difference regarding the frequency of other commonly observed variant branching patterns of the aortic arch. CONCLUSION: The bovine aortic arch, particularly the bovine arch subtype B, was significantly more common among embolic strokepatients. This might be due to altered hemodynamic properties within the bovine arch.
Authors: C Scala; U Leone Roberti Maggiore; M Candiani; P L Venturini; S Ferrero; T Greco; P Cavoretto Journal: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol Date: 2015-08-06 Impact factor: 7.299
Authors: Julia Dumfarth; Alan S Chou; Bulat A Ziganshin; Rohan Bhandari; Sven Peterss; Maryann Tranquilli; Hamid Mojibian; Hai Fang; John A Rizzo; John A Elefteriades Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2015-02-14 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Richard G Abramson; Kirsteen R Burton; John-Paul J Yu; Ernest M Scalzetti; Thomas E Yankeelov; Andrew B Rosenkrantz; Mishal Mendiratta-Lala; Brian J Bartholmai; Dhakshinamoorthy Ganeshan; Leon Lenchik; Rathan M Subramaniam Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Ayman G Mustafa; Mohammed Z Allouh; Jamaledin H Abu Ghaida; Ma'moon H Al-Omari; Wafa' A Mahmoud Journal: Surg Radiol Anat Date: 2016-06-23 Impact factor: 1.246
Authors: K Natsis; M Piagkou; N Lazaridis; T Kalamatianos; D Chytas; D Manatakis; N Anastasopoulos; M Loukas Journal: Surg Radiol Anat Date: 2021-01-02 Impact factor: 1.246