Background and purpose Cardiac thrombi are an important cause of embolic stroke. We studied the diagnostic yield and diagnostic accuracy of cardiac CT angiography (CTA) compared to echocardiography for detection of cardiac thrombi in ischemic stroke patients. Methods We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature on cardiac CTA versus echocardiography for detection of cardiac thrombi in ischemic stroke patients. We included studies (N ≥ 20) in which both cardiac CTA (index test) and echocardiography (reference test) were performed and data on cardiac thrombi were reported. Results were stratified for type of echocardiography: transesophageal (TEE) vs transthoracic (TTE). Results Out of 1530 studies, 14 were included (all single center cohort studies), with data on 1568 patients. Mean age varied between 52 and 69 years per study and 66% were men. Reported time intervals ranged from 0 to 21 days between stroke and first test, and from 0 to 199 days between tests. In ten studies that compared CTA to TEE, CTA detected cardiac thrombi in 87/1385 (6.3%) patients versus 68/1385 (4.9%) on TEE (p < 0.001). In four studies comparing CTA to TTE, CTA detected thrombi in 23/183 (12.5%) patients versus 12/183 (6.6%) on TTE (p = 0.010). Pooled sensitivity and specificity of CTA versus TEE were 86.0% (95% CI 65.6-95.2) and 97.4% (95% CI 95.0-98.7), respectively. Conclusions CTA may be a promising alternative to echocardiography for detection of cardiac thrombi in patients with ischemic stroke, especially now that CTA is standard care for patient selection for endovascular treatment. However, studies were too heterogeneous and of insufficient methodological quality to draw firm conclusions. Large, prospective studies on this topic are warranted.
Background:Guidelines recommend echocardiography to screen for structural sources of cardioembolism in patients with ischemic stroke. Cardiac CT is a promising alternative as a first-line screening method. We aimed to determine whether cardiac CT, acquired during the initial stroke imaging protocol, has a higher yield for detecting high-risk cardio-aortic sources of embolism than transthoracic echocardiography (TTE).Methods:We performed a prospective, single center, observational cohort study and included consecutive adult patients with acute ischemic stroke who underwent ECG-gated cardiac CT during the initial stroke imaging protocol. Patients also underwent routine stroke work-up, including TTE. The main outcome was the proportion of patients with a predefined high-risk cardio-aortic source of embolism on cardiac CT versus TTE in patients undergoing both investigations.Results:Between May 2018 and November 2020, 774 patients with a suspected ischemic stroke underwent hyperacute cardiac CT. We excluded 228 patients with a diagnosis other than ischemic stroke and 94 because they did not provide informed consent. Therefore, 452 patients (59.3% male, median age 72) were included. The median additional scan time of cardiac CT was 6 (interquartile range 5–7) minutes with poor scan quality in only 3%.In total, 350/452 (77.4%) patients underwent TTE, 99 of which were performed in an outpatient setting. Reasons for not undergoing TTE were: death (33, 7.3%) and TTE being too burdensome to perform in the outpatient setting (69, 15.3%). A high-risk cardio-aortic source of embolism was detected in 40/350 (11.4%) patients on CT, compared to 17/350 (4.9%) on TTE (odds ratio 5.60, 95%CI: 2.28–16.33). Cardiac thrombus was the most frequent finding (7.1% vs 0.6%). The diagnostic yield of cardiac CT in the full study population was 54/452 (12.2%). Among 175 patients with cryptogenic stroke after routine work-up, cardiac CT identified a cause of the stroke in 11 (6.3%).Discussion:Cardiac CT acquired in the acute phase of ischemic stroke is technically feasible and has a superior diagnostic yield compared to TTE for the detection of high-risk sources of embolism. Cardiac CT may be considered as an alternative to TTE to screen for cardioembolism.
Introduction: Data on the incidence of acute aortic dissection in the code stroke population are scarce. We report estimated incidence, clinical manifestations, treatment and outcomes of patients with an acute aortic dissection in a code stroke cohort from a comprehensive stroke centre. Patients and methods: We used data from a single-centre prospective registry of consecutive adult patients who presented to the emergency department between 2015 and 2018 with neurological deficits suggestive of an acute stroke ('code stroke'). All patients routinely underwent non-contrast computed tomography of the brain and computed tomography-angiography of the aortic arch, cervical and intracranial arteries. Results: Of 2874 code stroke patients, 1563 (54.4%) had acute ischaemia (ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack). Fifteen patients (0.5% of code stroke patients and 0.8% of patients with acute ischaemia) had an acute aortic dissection (all Stanford classification type A). Discerning clinical manifestations were decreased consciousness in 11/15 (73%), pain in 8/15 (53%) and low systolic blood pressure (mean 106 mmHg, SD30). Acute aortic dissection was an incidental finding during computed tomography-angiography in 4/15 (27%). Two out of 15 patients (13%) received intravenous thrombolysis, 9/15 (60%) underwent aortic surgery and 10/15 (67%) died. Of those who survived, 3/5 (60%) had a good functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale 0-2). Discussion and Conclusion: In our comprehensive stroke centre, about 1/200 code stroke patients and 1/125 patients with acute ischaemia had an acute aortic dissection. Multicentre studies are necessary to acquire a more reliable estimate of the incidence of acute aortic dissection in the code stroke population. Given the ramifications of missing this diagnosis, imaging of the entire aortic arch is important in these patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.