From the publishers of The New England Journal of Medicine

Save time and stay informed. Our physician-editors offer you clinical perspectives on key research and news.

  1. Home>
  2. Specialties>
  3. General Medicine>
  4. Summary and Comment

TRANSESOPHAGEAL ECHO FOR ALL STROKE PATIENTS?

Identifying which strokes are due to cardiovascular embolic sources can be difficult. Researchers at Johns Hopkins used a mathematical model to compare the cost-effectiveness of nine strategies -- anticoagulating all patients; anticoagulating no patients; and anticoagulation after identification of atrial thrombus by various combinations of cardiac history, transthoracic echocardiography (TTE), and transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). The model assumed that patients were adults, in normal sinus rhythm, and had stroke with no obvious cause.

Strategies including TEE identified the most atrial thrombi, while strategies including no imaging identified none. Anticoagulating all patients was the most costly and least effective strategy due to the high concomitant incidence of intracranial hemorrhage. TEE for all and TEE only for patients with left ventricular dysfunction or valvular heart disease were the most cost-effective strategies ($9,000 and $13,000 per quality-adjusted life-year for the two strategies, respectively). Transthoracic echo was not a component of any of the most cost-effective strategies in this analysis.

Comment: This model is limited by its reliance on data from atrial fibrillation patients, by not incorporating the clinical stroke history, and by uncertainty about the benefits and risks of anticoagulation in this population. If the assumptions are confirmed by future data, this analysis would support a greater role for TEE in guiding the anticoagulation decision in stroke.

— R Saitz

Published in Journal Watch General Medicine December 2, 1997

Citation(s):

McNamara RL et al. Echocardiographic identification of cardiovascular sources of emboli to guide clinical management of stroke: A cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann Intern Med 1997 Nov 1 127 775-787.

Your Remark:

Reader Remarks are intended to encourage lively discussion of clinical topics with your peers in the medical community. Please consider this when composing your remark.

Fields marked with an * are required.

Name as you'd like it to appear:

Submitting a comment indicates you have read and agreed to the remark guidelines and declare:*

PRIVACY: We will not use your email address, submitted for a comment, for any other purpose nor sell, rent, or share your e-mail address with any third parties. Please see our Privacy Policy.

 

CLEAR erases anything you've added in any part of the form. CONTINUE allows you to check your entire post (and edit it if necessary) before submitting.

To ensure that your Reader Remark is not formatted as one long paragraph, precede new paragraphs with either a blank line or an indentation.

Search

Advanced

Article Tools

Reader Remarks

Sign-In

Forgot your password?

New to Journal Watch?

E-mail Alerts

Delivered to your inbox.
Tailored to your interests. Free.

Sign Up Now!

Journal Watch Newsletters

Available in 13 specialties with convenient delivery and 10 free online CME exams.

Subscribe Now!

Copyright © 1997. Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.