You're viewing our updated article page. If you need more time to adjust, you can return to the old layout.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article

Front. Neurol.

Sec. Applied Neuroimaging

Transcranial Ultrasonography in the Detection of Cerebrovascular Accident (CVA): A Systematic Review and Bivariate Random-Effects Meta-Analysis

  • 1. Universidad UTE Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud Eugenio Espejo, Quito, Ecuador

  • 2. Universidad Internacional del Ecuador, Quito, Ecuador

  • 3. NeurALL Research Group, Quito, Ecuador

  • 4. Universidad de Las Americas, Quito, Ecuador

  • 5. University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland

Article metrics

View details

73

Views

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Abstract

Abstract: Background/Objectives: Stroke remains a leading cause of disability and death worldwide, with rapid diagnosis critical for effective treatment. Transcranial ultrasonography offers a potentially valuable diagnostic tool, particularly in resource-limited settings. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of transcranial Doppler (TCD) and transcranial color-coded duplex sonography (TCCS) for detecting ischemic and haemorrhagic stroke. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and bivariate random-effects meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO CRD42023471425). Three databases (Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science) were searched from inception to November 20, 2022. We included studies assessing adult (≥18 years) stroke patients using TCD or TCCS compared to reference standards (MRI, CT, or angiography). Exclusion criteria included paediatric populations, animal studies, vasospasm assessments, and studies with <10 participants. Four reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using NIH tools. Primary outcomes were pooled sensitivity and specificity analysed using bivariate random-effects models; this technique was chosen as it jointly analyses sensitivity and specificity using a random-effects model that accounts for their correlation and between-study variability. Results: From 16,397 records, 26 studies met inclusion criteria, with 13 studies (n=802 ultrasound examinations) included in meta-analysis. Overall diagnostic accuracy showed sensitivity of 81.1% (95% CI 73.1-87.2%) and specificity of 85.5% (95% CI 71.4-93.3%), with an AUC of 0.874. TCCS demonstrated higher sensitivity for haemorrhagic stroke (87.8%) than for ischemic stroke (77.2%). TCCS showed sensitivity of 74.8% (95% CI 66.4-81.6%) and specificity of 85.2% (95% CI 63.0-95.1%), with an AUC of 0.796. Risk of bias was low in 30.6% of studies, moderate in 50%, and high in 19.4%. Heterogeneity was low to moderate (I²=6.2-23.1%). Conclusions: Transcranial ultrasonogra-phy demonstrates good diagnostic accuracy for stroke detection. While operator-dependent and limited by acoustic window availability, these techniques, after thorough training and validation, may be prioritized in low-resource setting were computed tomography is not readily available through the means of formal capacitation and feasibility studies. The moderate risk of bias in half of included studies suggests a lack of higher-quality research.

Summary

Keywords

Bi-variate meta-analysis, Diagnostic power, Doppler ultrasound (DUS), Stroke, transcranial ultrasound

Received

30 November 2025

Accepted

09 February 2026

Copyright

© 2026 Pinto-Villalba, Paz, Arellano, García, Carrera, Cardona, Rodas and Leon-Rojas. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Jose Eduardo Leon-Rojas

Disclaimer

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Outline

Share article

Article metrics