Search

Intramural hematoma (IMH) is included in the spectrum of acute aortic syndrome and appears as an area of hyperattenuating crescentic thickening in the aortic wall that is best seen at nonenhanced computed tomography. IMH is historically believed to originate from ruptured vasa vasorum in the aortic media without an intimal tear, but there are reports of small intimomedial tears identified prospectively at imaging or found at surgery in some cases of IMH. These reports have blurred the distinction between aortic dissection and IMH and raise questions about what truly distinguishes the entities that compose acute aortic syndrome. The pathophysiology of these subgroups and the controversies surrounding their differentiation are discussed. The natural history of IMH is highly variable; it may resolve or progress to aneurysm, dissection, or rupture. The authors review various imaging prognostic factors that should be reported by the radiologist, including Stanford classification, maximum aortic diameter, maximum IMH thickness, focal contrast enhancement (including ulcerlike projection and intramural blood pool), and pleural or pericardial effusion. Medical (nonsurgical) versus surgical treatment strategies depend primarily on the Stanford classification, although more recent studies of Asian cohorts report success of initial medical treatment in patients with Stanford type A IMH, with timed (delayed) surgery for patients who develop complications. Understanding the imaging appearance and prognostic factors of IMH helps the radiologist and surgeon identify patients at greatest risk for complications to ensure appropriate treatment and improve patient outcomes. (©)RSNA, 2016.

Objective: Traumatic duodenal perforation requires emergent surgery, whereas duodenal hematoma can often be treated nonsurgically. We assessed the CT findings in patients with blunt duodenal trauma to determine if CT can be used to differentiate these two duodenal injuries., Material and Methods: Seven consecutive patients with blunt duodenal trauma (three with perforation, four with hematoma) who underwent CT as part of their initial diagnostic evaluation were included in the study. All three perforations and one of four hematomas were surgically proved. Diagnoses of duodenal hematoma in the other three patients were based on typical features on upper gastrointestinal studies and complete resolution of clinical findings after conservative treatment. The CT scans were retrospectively reviewed without knowledge of the specific type of duodenal injury, and the findings were correlated with the results of the gastrointestinal studies and surgical findings., Results: CT showed extraluminal gas or extravasated oral contrast material or both in the right anterior pararenal space in all three patients with duodenal perforation and in none of the patients with duodenal hematoma. Thickening of the duodenal wall and fluid in the right anterior pararenal space were seen in both groups of patients., Conclusion: Although the number of patients in the study was small, the results suggest that CT may be useful in differentiating duodenal perforation from hematoma without perforation. Extraluminal gas or extravasated oral contrast material or both were seen in the right anterior pararenal space in all three patients who had perforation and in none of the patients who had hematoma alone.