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
Ricardo Sebastian Pinto-Villalba 1
Andrea Paz 2
Jordy Arellano 3
Galo Alexander García 2
Mateo Carrera 2
Sergio Cardona 4
Jose A. Rodas 5
Jose Eduardo Leon-Rojas 4
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
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
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.