Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31298821›Full record

SynthesisAnnals of global health2019

Insonation versus Auscultation in Valvular Disorders: Is Aortic Stenosis the Exception? A Systematic Review.

Dylan Stanger, Darryl Wan, Nima Moghaddam, Niki Elahi, Edgar Argulian, Jagat Narula, Amir Ahmadi

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudySystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Annals of global health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Multi-modality imaging: Bird's eye view from the 2018 American Heart Association Scientific Sessions.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2019
    Review
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Dylan StangerDivision of Cardiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, CA.
Darryl WanDivision of Cardiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, CA.
Nima MoghaddamDivision of Cardiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, CA.
Niki ElahiIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Hospital, Mount Sinai Heart, New York, US.
Edgar ArgulianIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Hospital, Mount Sinai Heart, New York, US.
Jagat NarulaIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Hospital, Mount Sinai Heart, New York, US.
Amir AhmadiIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Hospital, Mount Sinai Heart, New York, US.
Mount Sinai Hospital · USUniversity of British Columbia · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHandheld echocardiography is being proposed as the fifth pillar of bedside physical cardiovascular examination (PE) and is referred to as insonation. Although there is emerging consensus that insonation is superior to PE for diagnosis of various cardiac conditions, superiority has not been consistently demonstrated for various valvular heart disease (VHD) lesions. The objective of this review is to systematically review the accuracy of insonation and auscultation in published literature for detection of common VHD.

methodsAn extensive literature search across three commonly used public databases allowed comparison of diagnostic characteristics of insonation and auscultation for common VHD including aortic stenosis, mitral regurgitation, aortic regurgitation, tricuspid regurgitation. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of insonation and auscultation for the detection of these VHD lesions were extracted for further analysis. The quality of evidence was assessed according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.

resultsEight hundred eighty studies were screened, and seven observational studies were selected for full analysis. Due to heterogeneity of data, this study was not amenable to meta-analysis. Insonation was superior to auscultation for the detection of all regurgitant lesions, but there was no significant difference in diagnostic ability of the two strategies for detection of aortic stenosis.

conclusionsCompared to auscultation, insonation, in its currently available form, is a superior diagnostic tool for regurgitant lesions. However, insonation fails to improve upon auscultation for recognition of aortic stenosis. This limitation is likely due to absence of spectral Doppler and inability of HE to assess transvalvular velocity and gradient.

Indexed as

EchocardiographyHeart AuscultationAortic Valve StenosisHeart Valve DiseasesHumansPoint-of-Care SystemsReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID31298821
PMCPMC6634326
OpenAlexW2960149861

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.