Sex differences in ascending aortic size reporting and growth on chest computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging.

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Diameter-based guidelines for prophylactic repair of ascending aortic aneurysms have led to routine aortic evaluation in chest imaging. Despite sex differences in aneurysm outcomes, there is little understanding of sex-specific aortic growth rates. Our objective was to evaluate sex-specific temporal changes in radiologist-reported aortic size as well as sex differences in aortic reporting. METHOD: In this cohort study, we queried radiology reports of chest computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging at an academic medical center from 1994 to 2022, excluding type A dissection. Aortic diameter was extracted using a custom text-processing algorithm. Growth rates were estimated using mixed-effects modeling with fixed terms for sex, age, and imaging modality, and patient-level random intercepts. Sex, age, and modality were evaluated as predictors of aortic reporting by logistic regression. RESULTS: This study included 89,863 scans among 46,622 patients (median [interquartile range] age, 64 [52-73]; 22,437 women [48%]). Aortic diameter was recorded in 14% (12,722/89,863 reports). Temporal trends were analyzed in 7194 scans among 1998 patients (age, 68 [60-75]; 677 women [34%]) with ≥2 scans. Aortic growth rate was significantly higher in women (0.22 mm/year [95% confidence interval 0.17-0.28] vs. 0.09 mm/year [0.06-0.13], respectively). Aortic reporting was significantly less common in women (odds ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.52-0.56; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: While aortic growth rates were small overall, women had over twice the growth rate of men. Aortic dimensions were much less frequently reported in women than men. Sex-specific standardized assessment of aortic measurements may be needed to address sex differences in aneurysm outcomes.