Diagnostic performance of cardiac computed tomography versus transesophageal echocardiography in infective endocarditis: A contemporary comparative meta-analysis

Objective: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and cardiac computed tomography (CCT) in diagnosing infective endocarditis (IE).

Background: TEE is a mainstay imaging modality for IE, while the use of CCT is becoming increasingly prevalent. Data directly comparing the diagnostic performance of these two imaging modalities for IE are limited.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of published literature in Embase, PubMed and Cochrane databases through October 1, 2020 for studies comparing diagnostic performance of CCT and TEE for the diagnosis of IE in the same patient populations. A meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy was performed using the bivariate model based on studies that used surgical pathology as a reference standard for defining endocarditis. From a total of 10 studies included in the meta-analysis, a total of 872 patients were evaluated.

Results: The pooled sensitivities and specificities of TEE for detecting vegetations were 96% and 83% respectively, whereas for CCT, they were 85% and 84%, respectively. In the prosthetic valve sub-group, the pooled sensitivities and specificities of TEE for detecting vegetations were 89% and 74% respectively, whereas for CCT, they were 78% and 94%, with CCT being more specific than TEE (p < 0.05). The pooled sensitivities and specificities of TEE for detecting periannular complications were 70% and 96% respectively, whereas for CCT, they were 88% and 93%, respectively. CCT showed a trend (p = 0.06) towards higher sensitivity than TEE for detection of periannular complications. The pooled sensitivities and specificities of TEE for detecting leaflet perforation were 79% and 93% respectively, whereas for CCT, they were 48% and 93% respectively, with TEE being more sensitive (p < 0.05). The two modalities also showed comparable diagnostic performance for detecting fistulae, paravalvular leaks and prosthetic valve dehiscence.

Conclusion: In a contemporary comparative meta-analysis, TEE and CCT demonstrated both good diagnostic accuracy for detecting valvular involvement and complications of IE. TEE performed better for detecting leaflet defects, whereas CCT performed better in cases of prosthetic valve involvement, and showed a trend towards improved detection of periannular complications. Appropriate, complementary use of both TEE and CCT in a multimodality imaging approach in clinical practice may achieve the highest diagnostic performance.