Key result
The third heart sound (S3) demonstrated lower sensitivity (0.23 vs 0.70) for diagnosing heart failure compared to left ventricular ejection fraction, though it presented higher specificity (0.94 vs 0.79).
Why the study?
This study aimed to compare the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of the third heart sound (S3) versus left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in heart failure.
Does the third heart sound (S3) have comparable diagnostic sensitivity and specificity to left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in diagnosing heart failure?
Meta-Analysis (n=5,614)
Does the third heart sound (S3) have comparable diagnostic sensitivity and specificity to left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in diagnosing heart failure?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.23% vs 0.7%
The third heart sound (S3) has high specificity but significantly lower sensitivity compared to LVEF for diagnosing heart failure, making it useful as an adjunctive early pathological assessment but insufficient as a standalone diagnostic tool.
S3 lacks sensitivity to exclude heart failure; confirms specificity advantage over LVEF and extends diagnostic meta-analyses.
Objective: This study aimed to compare the sensitivity and specificity of diagnosis between the third heart sound (S3) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in heart failure (HF). Methods: Relevant studies were searched in PubMed, SinoMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and the Cochrane Trial Register until February 20, 2022. The sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio (LR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were pooled. The symmetric receiver operator characteristic curve (SROC) and Fagan's nomogram were drawn. The source of heterogeneity was explored by meta-regression and subgroup analysis. Results: A total of 19 studies, involving 5,614 participants, were included. The combined sensitivity of S3 was 0.23 [95% confidence interval (CI) (0.15-0.33), specificity was 0.94 [95% CI (0.82-0.98)], area under the SROC curve was 0.49, and the DOR was 4.55; while the sensitivity of LVEF was 0.70 [95% CI (0.53-0.83)], specificity was 0.79 [95% CI (0.75-0.82)], area under the SROC curve was 0.79, and the DOR was 8.64. No publication bias was detected in Deeks' funnel plot. The prospective design, partial verification bias, and blind contributed to the heterogeneity in specificity, while adequate description of study participants contributed to the heterogeneity in sensitivity. In Fagan's nomogram, the post-test probability was 48% when the pre-test probability was set as 20%, while in LVEF, the post-test probability was 45% when the pre-test probability was set as 20%. Conclusion: The use of S3 alone presented lower sensitivity in diagnosing HF compared with LVEF, whereas it was useful in early pathological assessment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dao et al. (2022) conducted a meta-analysis in Heart failure (n=5,614). Third heart sound (S3) vs. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was evaluated on Sensitivity for diagnosing heart failure (95% CI 0.15-0.33). The third heart sound (S3) demonstrated lower sensitivity (0.23 vs 0.70) for diagnosing heart failure compared to left ventricular ejection fraction, though it presented higher specificity (0.94 vs 0.79).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: