The Hammock Sign in Computed Tomography as a Detection Aid for Bicuspid Aortic Valves

Daniel Devos; Charlotte Van Langenhove; Laurence Campens

doi:10.5334/jbsr.2974

Abstract

Introduction: Bicuspid aortic valve is difficult to detect on standard transverse images.

Purpose: We aimed to investigate the usefulness of the hammock sign for detection of bicuspid aortic valve.

Methods: We retrospectively investigated the usefulness of a newly proposed ‘hammock sign’ in a population of 45 contrast enhanced computer tomographic studies to discern tricuspid (22) from anatomical bicuspid aortic (23) valves. The gold standard of aortic morphology was the definite diagnosis in the patient’s medical file, established by computed tomography, magnetic resonance, or surgery.

Results: Computer tomographic (CT) studies of each aortic morphology were randomly evaluated for the presence of the hammock sign on coronal and sagittal images, by two readers blinded to the diagnosis. Sensitivity for detecting an anatomic bicuspid valve was 86%, and specificity was 100%.

Conclusion: The hammock sign allows for a quick and easy diagnosis of an anatomical bicuspid aortic valve, merely by scrolling through the standard coronal reconstructions of any type of contrast-enhanced thoracic CT study, and regardless of any other findings associated with bicuspid aortic valve. Functional bicuspid aortic valves were not the scope of this study.

References

Sillesen AS, Vøgg O, Pihl C, et al. Prevalence of Bicuspid Aortic Valve and Associated Aortopathy in Newborns in Copenhagen, Denmark. JAMA. 2021; 325(6): 561–567. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.27205
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ward C. Clinical significance of the bicuspid aortic valve. Heart. 2000; 83(1): 81–85. DOI: 10.1136/heart.83.1.81
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Della Corte A, Bancone C, Quarto C, et al. Predictors of ascending aortic dilatation with bicuspid aortic valve: a wide spectrum of disease expression. Eur J of Cardiothorac Surg. 2007; 31(3): 397–404; discussion 404–395. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2006.12.006
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Michelena HI, Khanna AD, Mahoney D, et al. Incidence of aortic complications in patients with bicuspid aortic valves. JAMA. 2011; 306(10): 1538–3598. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2011.1286
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Schaefer BM, Lewin MB, Stout KK, et al. The bicuspid aortic valve: an integrated phenotypic classification of leaflet morphology and aortic root shape. Heart. 2008; 94: 1634–1638. DOI: 10.1136/hrt.2007.132092
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Sievers HH, Schmidtke C. A classification system for the bicuspid aortic valve from 304 surgical specimens. J Thor Cardiovasc Surg. 2007; 133(5): 1226–1233. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2007.01.039
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Cramer PM, Prakash SK. Misclassification of bicuspid aortic valves is common and varies by imaging modality and patient characteristics. Echocardiography. 2019; 36(4): 761–765. DOI: 10.1111/echo.14295
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Moore AG, Agarwal PP. Hammock Sign. J Thorac Imaging. 2014; 29(5): W89. DOI: 10.1097/RTI.0000000000000095
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Shone JD, Sellers RD, Anderson RC, et al. The developmental complex of “parachute mitral valve,” supravalvular ring of left atrium, subaortic stenosis, and coarctation of aorta. Am J Cardiol. 1963; 11(0002-9149): 714–725. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9149(63)90098-5
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Vis JC, Rodríguez-Palomares JF, Teixidó-Tura G, et al. Implications of Asymmetry and Valvular Morphotype on Echocardiographic Measurements of the Aortic Root in Bicuspid Aortic Valve. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2019; 32(1): 105–112. DOI: 10.1016/j.echo.2018.08.004
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article

The Hammock Sign in Computed Tomography as a Detection Aid for Bicuspid Aortic Valves

Abstract

Paradigm

My account