OBJECTIVE: Recently, transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) has been proposed as the standard for the diagnosis of traumatic disruption of the aorta (TDA), replacing aortography. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy and practicality of TEE in the diagnosis of TDA. DESIGN: Prospective clinical trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with blunt trauma admitted with a suspected diagnosis of TDA were evaluated with TEE and aortography. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were evaluated with TEE and aortography. TEE was unsuccessful in five patients (15%). Of the remaining 29 patients, TEE results were true-positive in four and true-negative in 20. TEE results were false-positive in two patients, and three injuries were missed (two were proximal to the left subclavian artery, and one was a localized aortic disruption). Sensitivity and specificity of TEE were 57% and 91%, respectively, compared with aortography, for which sensitivity was 89% and specificity was 100%. CONCLUSION: Although the use of TEE in the diagnosis of TDA has several advantages, it is not more accurate than aortography. TEE should not replace aortography as the standard for the diagnosis of TDA.
OBJECTIVE: Recently, transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) has been proposed as the standard for the diagnosis of traumatic disruption of the aorta (TDA), replacing aortography. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy and practicality of TEE in the diagnosis of TDA. DESIGN: Prospective clinical trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Patients with blunt trauma admitted with a suspected diagnosis of TDA were evaluated with TEE and aortography. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were evaluated with TEE and aortography. TEE was unsuccessful in five patients (15%). Of the remaining 29 patients, TEE results were true-positive in four and true-negative in 20. TEE results were false-positive in two patients, and three injuries were missed (two were proximal to the left subclavian artery, and one was a localized aortic disruption). Sensitivity and specificity of TEE were 57% and 91%, respectively, compared with aortography, for which sensitivity was 89% and specificity was 100%. CONCLUSION: Although the use of TEE in the diagnosis of TDA has several advantages, it is not more accurate than aortography. TEE should not replace aortography as the standard for the diagnosis of TDA.
Authors: C Hainer; D Böckler; M Bernhard; K Scheuren; K M Stein; H Rauch; E Martin; M A Weigand Journal: Anaesthesist Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 1.041