HEART DISEASE
FORUM
Ascending aorta
Avatar_f_tn
by dhflp, Oct 30, 2013
2005 Cardiac MRI: aortic root (at sinuses) 3.9, mid ascending aorta 3.6 cm.  2013 Cardiac MRI: aortic root(at sinuses) 3.9 cm (stable), mid ascending aorta 3.75 cm (stable), proximal arch 3.4 cm, descending aorta at proximal descending 2.9 cm, and 2.7 cm at diaphragm.  "IMPRESSION: Stable mild prominence of the aortic root and ascending thoracic aorta- direct comparison from 2005 shows no interval change, within the measurement variability. Left ventricle is normal in size and function. Normal aortic, mitral, pulmonic, and tricuspid valve function."

1. What are upper normal ranges for  aortic root (at sinuses) and mid ascending aorta in a 58 year old male long distance runners?
1. Is the above normal finding for a 58 year old male long distance runner with BSA 2.12 ?
2. Is it true that upper normal range for ascending aorta is 3.7 cm when measured by echocardiogram and 3.8 cm when measured by mri? Thank you
Answer:
Avatar_dr_m_tn
by CCFHeartMD19Blank, Nov 08, 2013
hello,

Thanks for your question. It is hard to give you an accurate answer to your question without reviewing your scan personally but I can give you general pointers.
I presume that the MRI was performed in order to follow up on the mild dilatation of your aorta that was seen on prior scans. One of the most important things that we like to evaluate is the speed of dilatation, if any. In your case, since there has been no change compared to 8 years ago, these changes are likely benign.
There is a lot of variability in "normal" in the population and it depends on BSA, age, body shape among many other things. The general ball park for aortic diemension at ascending aorta is 15+/-2 mm/m2 of BSA. So with that calculation, you are at the upper limit of normal and likely to remain that way.
Echo does underestimate the dimensions slightly but that is usually not clinically significant.

Hope that helps.
Member Comments (1)