Key result
Cardiac ultrafast computed tomography was more sensitive for detecting intracardiac thrombus (57.1%) compared to two-dimensional echocardiography (14.3%) in patients with stroke.
Why the study?
Does cardiac ultrafast computed tomography improve the detection of intracardiac thrombus compared to two-dimensional echocardiography in patients with stroke of potential cardioembolic origin?
Observational (n=40)
Does cardiac ultrafast computed tomography improve the detection of intracardiac thrombus compared to two-dimensional echocardiography in patients with stroke of potential cardioembolic origin?
Absolute Event Rate: 57.1% vs 14.3%
Ultrafast cardiac CT may be more sensitive than 2D echocardiography for detecting intracardiac thrombus in patients with stroke of potential cardioembolic origin.
May support adjunctive ultrafast CT use in select stroke patients; leaves open need for prospective validation before practice change.
We studied 40 patients with stroke of potential cardioembolic origin by cardiac ultrafast computed tomography and two-dimensional echocardiography. Cardiac ultrafast computed tomography was more sensitive (positive in eight of 14 instances) than two-dimensional echocardiography (positive in two of 14 instances) for the detection of intracardiac thrombus, which was found in 13 patients. Mitral anular calcification was diagnosed more often by two-dimensional echocardiography (four of five instances) than by cardiac ultrafast computed tomography (one of five instances); this implies a high incidence of false-positives for the former. Cardiac ultrafast computed tomography showed that one half of the patients (21 of 40) had coronary artery calcification, indicating a high incidence of coronary atheroma in this patient population. Future studies comparing brain and cardiac pathology with the findings of cardiac ultrafast computed tomography and patient prognosis are needed to define the significance and utility of this technique in patients with stroke.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Helgason et al. (1989) conducted an observational in Stroke of potential cardioembolic origin (n=40). Cardiac ultrafast computed tomography vs. Two-dimensional echocardiography was evaluated on Detection of intracardiac thrombus. Cardiac ultrafast computed tomography was more sensitive for detecting intracardiac thrombus (57.1%) compared to two-dimensional echocardiography (14.3%) in patients with stroke.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: