Key result
Contemporary TEE imaging in 2019 demonstrated higher sensitivity for detecting infective endocarditis compared to 2011 (95.3% vs 85.7%; OR 4.06, 95% CI 1.41-11.71, P=0.01).
Why the study?
Infective endocarditis carries high morbidity and mortality, and repeat examination is warranted following an initial negative transesophageal echocardiogram with high clinical suspicion, motivating an evaluation of contemporary TEE diagnostic performance.
Does contemporary TEE imaging improve the sensitivity to detect infective endocarditis in adult patients compared to older imaging technology?
Cohort (n=242)
Does contemporary TEE imaging improve the sensitivity to detect infective endocarditis in adult patients compared to older imaging technology?
Odds Ratio: 4.06 (95% CI 1.41–11.71)
Absolute Event Rate: 95.3% vs 85.7%
p-value: p=0.01
Contemporary TEE imaging with higher frame rates and 3D technology significantly improves the sensitivity for detecting infective endocarditis, particularly for prosthetic valves.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Contemporary TEE was associated with higher initial IE sensitivity; leaves open whether this reduces repeat TEE need in practice.
Montané et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Infective endocarditis (n=242). Contemporary TEE imaging (2019) vs. TEE imaging in 2011 was evaluated on sensitivity of initial TEE to detect IE (OR 4.06, 95% CI 1.41-11.71, p=0.01). Contemporary TEE imaging in 2019 demonstrated higher sensitivity for detecting infective endocarditis compared to 2011 (95.3% vs 85.7%; OR 4.06, 95% CI 1.41-11.71, P=0.01).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: