Key result
Auscultation yields only ~31% sensitivity for detecting abnormal echo findings in children with murmurs.
Why the study?
The majority of cardiac murmurs in children are innocent, yet cardiac murmur is the most common reason for pediatric cardiology consultation worldwide, necessitating evaluation of auscultation versus echocardiography findings.
Does echocardiographic evaluation improve the detection of cardiac defects compared to auscultation alone in children with cardiac murmurs?
Population
667 children referred to pediatric cardiology clinic with cardiac murmur, mean age 5.1 years, 54.6% male
Comparison
Auscultation versus echocardiographic evaluation
Design
Observational cross-sectional study
Authors
Loading...
Auscultation misses minor defects in referred children (sensitivity 31%); leaves open whether routine echocardiography improves outcomes.
Observational (n=667)
Does echocardiographic evaluation improve the detection of cardiac defects compared to auscultation alone in children with cardiac murmurs?
p-value: p=<0.001
Auscultation alone misses minor cardiac defects in children with murmurs, suggesting echocardiography is necessary for accurate evaluation.
Yıldız et al. (2015) conducted an observational in Cardiac murmur (n=667). Physical examination (auscultation) vs. Echocardiography was evaluated on Discrimination between normal and abnormal echocardiographic findings (p=<0.001). Physical examination (auscultation) had a sensitivity of 31% and accuracy of 83% for discriminating between normal and abnormal echocardiographic findings in children with cardiac murmurs.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: