OBJECTIVES: For a moderately dilated ascending aorta (diameter 35–54 mm), current guidelines recommend continuous annual or semi-annual examinations with computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. However, few data have shown the yield and benefit of such a protocol. This study aimed to investigate the fate of a moderately dilated ascending aorta and thereby determine the adequate imaging interval.

METHODS: In our institutional database, we identified adult patients having an ascending aortic diameter ≥40 mm in contrast-enhanced computed tomography and follow-up imaging(s) after ≥1 year. Of the 509 patients (mean age 67.2 ± 10.4 years) enrolled in the study, the maximal diameter of the ascending aorta was compared between the first and last images. Also, their medical records were reviewed to investigate the associated illness and clinical events.

RESULTS: The mean growth rate of the patients with a 40–44 mm (n = 321), 45–49 mm (n = 142) and ≥50 mm (n = 46) ascending aorta was 0.3 ± 0.5, 0.3 ± 0.5 and 0.7 ± 0.9 mm/year, respectively. During the mean interval of 4.3 ± 2.4 years, significant progression (diameter increase by ≥5 mm) occurred in 3.4, 5.6 and 21.7%, respectively. The 3- to 5-year rates of freedom from significant progression were 99.1%–96.5% (40–44 mm) and 97.8%–96.4% (45–49 mm). In multivariate analysis, initial ascending aortic diameter ≥45 mm and aortic valve regurgitation were significantly associated with significant progression. Acute type A aortic dissection occurred in 5 patients (1%), before the maximal diameter of the ascending aorta reached 55 mm or significant progression was observed.

CONCLUSIONS: For a moderately dilated ascending aorta not exceeding 45 mm in maximal diameter and stable in the first annual follow-up image, a 3- to 4-year interval would be reasonable before subsequent imaging. More frequent imaging may be warranted in patients with aortic valve insufficiency or with an aortic diameter ≥45 mm.