Cardiac CT vs Echocardiography for Intracardiac Thrombus Detection in Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 43 Studies

• Published in: Neurology Vol. 103; no. 7; p. e209771
• Main Authors: Ghozy, Sherief, Liu, Michael, Kobeissi, Hassan, Mortezaei, Ali, Amoukhteh, Melika, Abbas, Alzhraa S, Dmytriw, Adam A, Kadirvel, Ramanathan, Rabinstein, Alejandro A, Kallmes, David F, Nasr, Deena
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 08.10.2024
• Subjects: Echocardiography - methods; Heart Diseases - complications; Heart Diseases - diagnostic imaging; Humans; Ischemic Stroke - diagnostic imaging; Thrombosis - diagnostic imaging; Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods
• ISSN: 1526-632X
• DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000209771

Ischemic stroke, a leading cause of mortality, necessitates understanding its mechanism for effective prevention. Echocardiography, especially transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), is the gold standard for detection of cardiac sources of stroke including left atrial thrombus, although its invasiveness, operator skill dependence, and limited availability in some centers prompt exploration of alternatives, such as cardiac CT (CCT). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis assessing the ability of CCT in the detection of intracardiac thrombus compared with echocardiography. We searched 4 databases up through September 8, 2023. Major search terms included a combination of the terms "echocardiograph," "CT," "TEE," "imaging," "stroke," "undetermined," and "cryptogenic." The current systematic literature review of the English language literature was reported in adherence to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting guidelines. We assessed risk of bias using the QUADAS-2 tool and used random-effects meta-analysis to calculate different diagnostic metrics. The meta-analysis investigating CCT vs echocardiography for intracardiac thrombus detection yielded a total of 43 studies of 9,552 patients. Risk-of-bias assessment revealed a predominantly low risk of bias in the flow and timing, index test, and patient selection domains and a predominantly unclear risk of bias in the reference standard domain. The analysis revealed an overall sensitivity of 98.38% (95% CI 89.2-99.78) and specificity of 96.0% (95% CI 92.55-97.88). Subgroup analyses demonstrated that delayed-phase, electrocardiogram-gated CCT had the highest sensitivity (100%; 95% CI 0-100) while early-phase, nongated CCT exhibited a sensitivity of 94.31% (95% CI 28.58-99.85). The diagnostic odds ratio was 98.59 (95% CI 44.05-220.69). Heterogeneity was observed, particularly in specificity and diagnostic odds ratio estimates. CCT demonstrates high sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratios in detecting intracardiac thrombus compared with traditional echocardiography. Limitations include the lack of randomized controlled studies, and other cardioembolic sources of stroke such as valvular disease, cardiac function, and aortic arch disease were not examined in our analysis. Large-scale studies are warranted to further evaluate CCT as a promising alternative for identifying intracardiac thrombus and other sources of cardioembolic stroke.