Abstract Number ‐ 17: Robot‐assisted transcranial Doppler versus transthoracic echocardiography for right to left shunt detection: Final Results
Introduction Right to left shunt (RLS), including patent foramen ovale (PFO), is a recognized risk factor for stroke. RLS/PFO diagnosis is made by transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) which is insensitive, transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) which is invasive, and transcranial Doppler (TCD) which...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2023-03-01
|
| Series: | Stroke: Vascular and Interventional Neurology |
| Online Access: | https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/SVIN.03.suppl_1.017 |
| _version_ | 1797803556614438912 |
|---|---|
| author | Mark N Rubin Ruchir Shah Thomas Devlin Teddy S Youn Michael Waters John J Volpi Aaron Stayman Colleen Douville Ted Lowenkopf Georgios Tsivgoulis Andrei V Alexandrov |
| author_facet | Mark N Rubin Ruchir Shah Thomas Devlin Teddy S Youn Michael Waters John J Volpi Aaron Stayman Colleen Douville Ted Lowenkopf Georgios Tsivgoulis Andrei V Alexandrov |
| author_sort | Mark N Rubin |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Introduction Right to left shunt (RLS), including patent foramen ovale (PFO), is a recognized risk factor for stroke. RLS/PFO diagnosis is made by transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) which is insensitive, transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) which is invasive, and transcranial Doppler (TCD) which is noninvasive and accurate but scarce. Methods We conducted a multi‐center device clinical trial of robot‐assisted TCD (raTCD) versus TTE for RLS diagnosis in patients who presented with an event suspicious for embolic cerebrovascular ischemia. raTCD was performed with standard TCD bubble study technique. TTE bubble study was performed to local standards. The primary outcome was rate of RLS detection by raTCD versus TTE. Results 133 patients were enrolled (intention to treat, ITT) and 126 subjects had complete data. In the ITT cohort, mean age was 60 +/‐ 15 years, 46% were women, and 92% of qualifying events were diagnosed as ischemic stroke. raTCD was positive for RLS in 82 subjects (64%) and TTE was positive in 26 (20%) [absolute difference 43.4% (95% CI 34.3%‐52.5%), p < 0.001]. On prespecified secondary analysis, large RLS was detected by raTCD in 35 subjects (28%) vs 13 (10%) by TTE [absolute difference 17.5% (95% CI 10.1%‐24.8%), p < 0.001]. There were no serious adverse events. Conclusions raTCD was safe and 3 times more likely to diagnose RLS than TTE. TTE completely missed or underdiagnosed two thirds of large shunts diagnosed by raTCD. The raTCD device, used by health professionals with no prior TCD training, may allow providers to achieve the known sensitivity of TCD for RLS and PFO detection without the need for an experienced operator. TCD is the superior screen for RLS compared to TTE. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-13T05:23:42Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-cc5a7ee437184534abb587ede35f3909 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2694-5746 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-13T05:23:42Z |
| publishDate | 2023-03-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Stroke: Vascular and Interventional Neurology |
| spelling | doaj.art-cc5a7ee437184534abb587ede35f39092023-06-15T10:40:48ZengWileyStroke: Vascular and Interventional Neurology2694-57462023-03-013S110.1161/SVIN.03.suppl_1.017Abstract Number ‐ 17: Robot‐assisted transcranial Doppler versus transthoracic echocardiography for right to left shunt detection: Final ResultsMark N Rubin0Ruchir Shah1Thomas Devlin2Teddy S Youn3Michael Waters4John J Volpi5Aaron Stayman6Colleen Douville7Ted Lowenkopf8Georgios Tsivgoulis9Andrei V Alexandrov10University of Tennessee Health Science Center Memphis Tennessee United States of AmericaCHI Memorial, Chattanooga Tennessee United States of AmericaCHI Memorial, Chattanooga Tennessee United States of AmericaBarrow Neurological Institute Phoenix Arizona United States of AmericaBarrow Neurological Institute Phoenix Arizona United States of AmericaHouston Methodist Research Institute Houston Texas United States of AmericaSwedish Medical Center Seattle Washington United States of AmericaSwedish Medical Center Seattle Washington United States of AmericaProvidence Portland Oregon United States of AmericaNational & Kapodistrian University of Athens Athens GreeceUniversity of Tennessee Health Science Center Memphis Tennessee United States of AmericaIntroduction Right to left shunt (RLS), including patent foramen ovale (PFO), is a recognized risk factor for stroke. RLS/PFO diagnosis is made by transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) which is insensitive, transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) which is invasive, and transcranial Doppler (TCD) which is noninvasive and accurate but scarce. Methods We conducted a multi‐center device clinical trial of robot‐assisted TCD (raTCD) versus TTE for RLS diagnosis in patients who presented with an event suspicious for embolic cerebrovascular ischemia. raTCD was performed with standard TCD bubble study technique. TTE bubble study was performed to local standards. The primary outcome was rate of RLS detection by raTCD versus TTE. Results 133 patients were enrolled (intention to treat, ITT) and 126 subjects had complete data. In the ITT cohort, mean age was 60 +/‐ 15 years, 46% were women, and 92% of qualifying events were diagnosed as ischemic stroke. raTCD was positive for RLS in 82 subjects (64%) and TTE was positive in 26 (20%) [absolute difference 43.4% (95% CI 34.3%‐52.5%), p < 0.001]. On prespecified secondary analysis, large RLS was detected by raTCD in 35 subjects (28%) vs 13 (10%) by TTE [absolute difference 17.5% (95% CI 10.1%‐24.8%), p < 0.001]. There were no serious adverse events. Conclusions raTCD was safe and 3 times more likely to diagnose RLS than TTE. TTE completely missed or underdiagnosed two thirds of large shunts diagnosed by raTCD. The raTCD device, used by health professionals with no prior TCD training, may allow providers to achieve the known sensitivity of TCD for RLS and PFO detection without the need for an experienced operator. TCD is the superior screen for RLS compared to TTE.https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/SVIN.03.suppl_1.017 |
| spellingShingle | Mark N Rubin Ruchir Shah Thomas Devlin Teddy S Youn Michael Waters John J Volpi Aaron Stayman Colleen Douville Ted Lowenkopf Georgios Tsivgoulis Andrei V Alexandrov Abstract Number ‐ 17: Robot‐assisted transcranial Doppler versus transthoracic echocardiography for right to left shunt detection: Final Results Stroke: Vascular and Interventional Neurology |
| title | Abstract Number ‐ 17: Robot‐assisted transcranial Doppler versus transthoracic echocardiography for right to left shunt detection: Final Results |
| title_full | Abstract Number ‐ 17: Robot‐assisted transcranial Doppler versus transthoracic echocardiography for right to left shunt detection: Final Results |
| title_fullStr | Abstract Number ‐ 17: Robot‐assisted transcranial Doppler versus transthoracic echocardiography for right to left shunt detection: Final Results |
| title_full_unstemmed | Abstract Number ‐ 17: Robot‐assisted transcranial Doppler versus transthoracic echocardiography for right to left shunt detection: Final Results |
| title_short | Abstract Number ‐ 17: Robot‐assisted transcranial Doppler versus transthoracic echocardiography for right to left shunt detection: Final Results |
| title_sort | abstract number 17 robot assisted transcranial doppler versus transthoracic echocardiography for right to left shunt detection final results |
| url | https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/SVIN.03.suppl_1.017 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT marknrubin abstractnumber17robotassistedtranscranialdopplerversustransthoracicechocardiographyforrighttoleftshuntdetectionfinalresults AT ruchirshah abstractnumber17robotassistedtranscranialdopplerversustransthoracicechocardiographyforrighttoleftshuntdetectionfinalresults AT thomasdevlin abstractnumber17robotassistedtranscranialdopplerversustransthoracicechocardiographyforrighttoleftshuntdetectionfinalresults AT teddysyoun abstractnumber17robotassistedtranscranialdopplerversustransthoracicechocardiographyforrighttoleftshuntdetectionfinalresults AT michaelwaters abstractnumber17robotassistedtranscranialdopplerversustransthoracicechocardiographyforrighttoleftshuntdetectionfinalresults AT johnjvolpi abstractnumber17robotassistedtranscranialdopplerversustransthoracicechocardiographyforrighttoleftshuntdetectionfinalresults AT aaronstayman abstractnumber17robotassistedtranscranialdopplerversustransthoracicechocardiographyforrighttoleftshuntdetectionfinalresults AT colleendouville abstractnumber17robotassistedtranscranialdopplerversustransthoracicechocardiographyforrighttoleftshuntdetectionfinalresults AT tedlowenkopf abstractnumber17robotassistedtranscranialdopplerversustransthoracicechocardiographyforrighttoleftshuntdetectionfinalresults AT georgiostsivgoulis abstractnumber17robotassistedtranscranialdopplerversustransthoracicechocardiographyforrighttoleftshuntdetectionfinalresults AT andreivalexandrov abstractnumber17robotassistedtranscranialdopplerversustransthoracicechocardiographyforrighttoleftshuntdetectionfinalresults |