Relationship between anatomical variations in the aortic arch and risk of aneurysm formation ‒ a systematic review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15584/ejcem.2026.2.7Keywords:
aberrant right subclavian artery, risk of aneurysm, variations in aortic arch, bovine arch, risk stratification, thoracic surgeryAbstract
Introduction and aim. Anatomical variation in the aortic arch has been proposed as an aneurysm risk factor based on changed hemodynamic forces and structural stress in arterial walls. Knowledge of these variations will be valuable in optimizing surgical planning and management of risks for patients to undergo cardiovascular and thoracic procedures. This systematic review summarized existing literature to assess the relation of different variations in the aortic arch with the risk of aneurysm formation by consolidating evidence of clinical relevance and predictive markers of risk.
Material and methods. We conducted our searches in seven databases: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and ProQuest, using Boolean operators and MeSH terms. The ROBINS-I tool was used to assess the risk of bias in studies, including confounding, participant selection, and outcome reporting. GRADE was used to evaluate global certainty of evidence, which also considered consistency, directness, and precision of evidence. Studies were eligible based on strict eligibility criteria and reported findings on specific aortic arch and their potential association with aneurysm formation.
Results. The review included 12 studies that varied in terms of sample size and used a mostly retrospective design. According to the findings evaluated, certain forms of the aortic arch, for example, the bovine arch and aberrant right subclavian artery, posed an increased risk of developing proximal versus distal aneurysms. Advanced imaging studies, such as 4D flow MRI and enhanced CT, aided in the selection of at-risk patients, as they described the flow pressure dynamics with detailed assessments. While several authors reported consistent associations of anatomical variation with risk, other authors found no significant correlation and thus suggested variability in clinical relevance. The general review showed both converging and divergent findings of the review about the predictive value of certain types of arch for aneurysm risk.
Conclusion. This systematic review highlights the incorporation of knowledge on aortic arch variation as part of the detailed risk assessment required in aneurysmal formation among patients. Although some forms, such as the bovine arch and the aberrant right subclavian artery, did indeed demonstrate the potential to be predictive of complications, study inconsistencies provide reason for continuing research on the topic. Advanced imaging may improve medical decision-making, as patient risk stratification would be feasible with greater information on anatomical variation.
Downloads
References
Keet K, Gunston G, Alexander R. Variations in the branching pattern of the aortic arch: An African perspective. Eur J Anat. 2019;23:91.
Baudo M, Sicouri S, Yamashita Y, et al. Clinical presentation and management of the cervical aortic arch in the adult population: a review of case reports. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2024;38(8):1777-1785. doi:10.1053/j.jvca.2024.03.041
Boillat G, Franssen T, Wanderer S, et al. Anatomical variations of the common carotid arteries and neck structures of the New Zealand White rabbit and their implications for the development of preclinical extracranial aneurysm models. Brain Sci. 2023;13(2):222. doi:10.3390/brainsci13020222
Pidvalna U, Mirchuk M, Beshley D, Mateshuk-Vatseba L. Morphometric characteristics of the aorta and heart in situ versus totalis. Anat Cell Biol. 2022;55(2):259-263. doi:10.5115/acb.21.252
Zhang X, Peng Y, Li G, et al. Elongation of the proximal descending thoracic aorta and associated hemodynamics increase the risk of acute type B aortic dissection. Technol Health Care. 2024;32(2):765-777. doi:10.3233/THC-230194
Zhong YL, Ma WG, Zhu JM et al. Surgical repair of cervical aortic arch: An alternative classification scheme based on experience in 35 patients. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020;159(6):2202-2213.e4. doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2019.03.143
Ahmed M, Zyck S, Gould GC. Initial experience of subcutaneous nitroglycerin for distal transradial access in neurointerventions. Surg Neurol Int. 2021;12:513. doi:10.25259/SNI_711_2021
Tricarico R, Tran-Son-Tay R, Laquian L, et al. Haemodynamics of different configurations of a left subclavian artery stent graft for thoracic endovascular aortic repair. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2020;59(1):7-15. doi:10.1016/j.ejvs.2019.06.028
Solano A, Pizano A, Azam J, et al. Kommerell's diverticulum in a right-sided aortic arch with an aberrant left subclavian artery hybrid repair. Vasc Endovascular Surg. 2023;57(8):954-959. doi:10.1177/15385744231183310
Mirande MH, Durhman MR, Smith HF. Anatomic investigation of two cases of aberrant right subclavian artery syndrome, including the effects on external vascular dimensions. Diagnostics (Basel). 2020;10(8):592. doi:10.3390/diagnostics10080592
Starke RM, Abecassis IJ, Saini V, et al. Initial experience of using a large-bore (0.096″ inner diameter) access catheter in neurovascular interventions. Interv Neuroradiol. 2024;30(3):372-379. doi:10.1177/15910199221127074
Nekoui M, Pirruccello JP, Di Achille P, et al. Spatially distinct genetic determinants of aortic dimensions influence risks of aneurysm and stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022;80(5):486-497. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2022.05.024
Page MJ, Moher D, Bossuyt PM, et al. PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: Updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n160. doi:10.1136/bmj.n160
Igelström E, Campbell M, Craig P, Katikireddi SV. Cochrane's risk of bias tool for non-randomized studies (ROBINS-I) is frequently misapplied: A methodological systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol. 2021;140:22-32. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.08.022
Bezerra CT, Grande AJ, Galvão VK, et al. Assessment of the strength of recommendation and quality of evidence: GRADE checklist. A descriptive study. Sao Paulo Med J. 2022;140(6):829-836. doi:10.1590/1516-3180.2022.0043.R1.07042022
Açar G, Çiçekcibaşı AE, Uysal E, et al. Anatomical variations of the aortic arch branching pattern using CT angiography: A proposal for a different morphological classification with clinical relevance. Anat Sci Int. 2022;97:65-78. doi:10.1007/s12565-021-00627-6
Bouaou K, Dietenbeck T, Soulat G, et al. Four-dimensional flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance aortic cross-sectional pressure changes and their associations with flow patterns in health and ascending thoracic aortic aneurysm. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2024;26(1):101030. doi:10.1016/j.jocmr.2024.101030
Budhiraja V, Rastogi R, Jain V, et al. Anatomical variations in the branching pattern of human aortic arch: A cadaveric study from central India. ISRN Anat. 2013;2013:828969. doi:10.5402/2013/828969
Celikyay ZR, Koner AE, Celikyay F, et al. Frequency and imaging findings of variations in human aortic arch anatomy based on multidetector computed tomography data. Clin Imaging. 2013;37(6):1011-1019. doi:10.1016/j.clinimag.2013.07.008
Della Corte A, Rubino AS, Montella AP, et al. Implications of abnormal ascending aorta geometry for risk prediction of acute type A aortic dissection. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2021;60(4):978-986. doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezab218
Ikeno Y, Koide Y, Matsueda T, et al. Anatomical variations of aortic arch vessels in Japanese patients with aortic arch disease. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2019;67:219-226. doi:10.1007/s11748-018-1001-3
Karacan A, Türkvatan A, Karacan K. Anatomical variations of aortic arch branching: Evaluation with computed tomographic angiography. Cardiol Young. 2014;24(3):485-493. doi: 10.1017/S1047951113000656
Natsis KI, Tsitouridis IA, Didagelos MV, et al. Anatomical variations in the branches of the human aortic arch in 633 angiographies: Clinical significance and literature review. Surg Radiol Anat. 2009;31(5):319-323. doi:10.1007/s00276-008-0442-2
Pandalai U, Pillay M, Moorthy S, et al. Anatomical variations of the aortic arch: A computerized tomography-based study. Cureus. 2021;13(2):e13115. doi:10.7759/cureus.13115
Salehi F, Nadeem IM, Kwan BYM, et al. Investigating the association between aortic arch variants and intracranial aneurysms. Can J Neurol Sci. 2022;49(3):364-367. doi:10.1017/cjn.2021.112
Sun J, Zhang S, Qi H, et al. Association of the bovine aortic arch and bicuspid aortic valve with thoracic aortic disease. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2023;23(1):60. doi: 10.1186/s12872-023-03095-0.
Zhu J, Tong G, Zhuang D, et al. Surgical treatment strategies for patients with type A aortic dissection involving arch anomalies. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022;9:979431. doi:10.3389/fcvm.2022.979431
Rotundu A, Nedelcu AH, Tepordei RT, et al. Medical-surgical implications of branching variation of human aortic arch known as bovine aortic arch (BAA). J Pers Med. 2024;14:678. doi:10.3390/jpm14070678
Gold M, Khamesi M, Sivakumar M, et al. Right-left propensity of cardiogenic cerebral embolism in standard versus bovine aortic arch variant. Clin Anat. 2018;31:310-313. doi:10.1002/ca.23045
Matakas JD, Gold MM, Sterman J, et al. Bovine arch and stroke laterality. J Am Heart Assoc. 2020;9:e015390. doi:10.1161/JAHA.119.015390
Samadhiya S, Sardana V, Bhushan B, et al. Propensity of stroke in standard versus various aortic arch variants: A 200-patient study. Ann Indian Acad Neurol. 2022;25:634-639. doi:10.4103/aian.aian_710_21
Huang F, Li X, Zhang Z, et al. Comparison of two surgical approaches for acute type A aortic dissection: hybrid debranching versus total arch replacement. J Cardiothorac Surg. 2022;17:166. doi:10.1186/s13019-022-01920-9
Montorsi P, Galli S, Ravagnani PM, et al. Carotid artery stenting in patients with left ICA stenosis and bovine aortic arch: A single-center experience in 60 consecutive patients treated via the right radial or brachial approach. J Endovasc Ther. 2014;21:127-136. doi:10.1583/13-4491MR.1
Burzotta F, Nerla R, Pirozzolo G, et al. Clinical and procedural impact of aortic arch anatomic variants in carotid stenting procedures. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;86:480-489. doi:10.1002/ccd.25947
Popieluszko P, Henry BM, Sanna B, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of variations in branching patterns of the adult aortic arch. J Vasc Surg. 2018;68(1):298-306.e10. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2017.06.097
Baz RO, Refi D, Scheau C, Axelerad A, Baz RA, Niscoveanu C. CT angiography for aortic arch anomalies: prevalence, diagnostic efficacy, and illustrative findings. Diagnostics (Basel). 2024;14(17):1851. doi:10.3390/diagnostics14171851
Lazaridis N, Piagkou M, Loukas M, et al. A systematic classification of the vertebral artery variable origin: clinical and surgical implications. Surg Radiol Anat. 2018;40(7):779-797. doi:10.1007/s00276-018-1987-3
Ahmad W, Wegner M, Dorweiler B. Meta-analysis and meta-regression of the total endovascular aortic repair in aortic arch. Vasa. 2023;52(3):175-185. doi:10.1024/0301-1526/a001061
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 European Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Our open access policy is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition: this means that articles have free availability on the public Internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from having access to the Internet itself.
All articles are published with free open access under the CC-BY Creative Commons attribution license (the current version is CC-BY, version 4.0). If you submit your paper for publication by the Eur J Clin Exp Med, you agree to have the CC-BY license applied to your work. Under this Open Access license, you, as the author, agree that anyone may download and read the paper for free. In addition, the article may be reused and quoted provided that the original published version is cited. This facilitates freedom in re-use and also ensures that Eur J Clin Exp Med content can be mined without barriers for the research needs.
