Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 6, 2025

Novel and Innovative Hybrid Technique for Type A Aortic Dissection
Published on: March 28, 2025
Thoracic aortic dissection classification among radiologists and surgeons and management trends
Jaselyn Grant1, Ariel Z Allen2, Leah Traube3
1Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA.
Insights
Radiologists and surgeons showed a low discrepancy rate in classifying aortic dissection (AD). Management for type B AD/IMH increasingly favors endovascular approaches, signaling a practice evolution.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Radiology
- Vascular Surgery
Background:
- Aortic dissection (AD) requires accurate classification for appropriate management.
- Discrepancies between radiology and surgical interpretations can impact patient care.
- Understanding current management trends for AD is crucial.
Purpose of the Study:
- To assess the agreement between radiologists and surgeons in classifying newly diagnosed aortic dissection (AD) using the Stanford classification.
- To analyze patient management strategies for Stanford type A and type B AD/IMH.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective review of 3255 CT scans performed for suspected AD.
- Analysis of radiology reports and electronic health records for AD/IMH diagnosis and Stanford type.
- Evaluation of surgical versus medical management for different AD types.
Main Results:
- A low discrepancy rate (1.6%) was observed between radiologists and surgeons in AD classification.
- Type A AD/IMH was predominantly surgically managed (85%).
- Type B AD/IMH showed a shift towards endovascular treatment (56% surgical, 95% of which were endovascular).
Conclusions:
- There is high concordance between radiologists and surgeons in classifying aortic dissection.
- Endovascular treatment is the predominant approach for type B AD/IMH, indicating a change from historical management.
- These findings highlight evolving clinical practice in managing aortic dissection subtypes.
Objective:
To investigate the discrepancy rate in classification of newly diagnosed aortic dissection (AD) between radiologists and surgeons and explore patient management.
Methods:
3255 CTs performed for AD from June 2013 to June 2018 at our institution were retrospectively identified. CT reports and charts were reviewed to identify newly diagnosed AD or intramural hematoma (IMH). Radiology reports and electronic health records were reviewed for Stanford type A or B classification and surgical versus medical management.
Results:
Newly diagnosed AD was diagnosed in 1.9% (62/3255) with one false positive, mean age 60 years. Discrepancy rate was 1.6% (1/61). Type A AD/IMH was treated surgically in 85% (23/27), medically in 15% (4/27). Type B AD/IMH was treated surgically in 56% (19/34) (endovascular 95% (18/19)), medically in 44% (15/34).
Conclusions:
Discrepancy rate between radiologists and surgeons in Stanford classification of aortic dissection was low. Management of type B AD/IMH was predominantly endovascular, reflecting a shift in practice from the historical binary management strategy of type A dissections being treated surgically and type B dissections medically.
Related Concept Videos
Aneurysm II: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Studies
Aneurysm III: Interprofessional Care
Aortic Regurgitation III: Medical Management
Aortic Regurgitation I: Introduction
Aneurysm IV: Nursing Management
Aortic Regurgitation II: Clinical Features and Diagnostic Tests

