Murmur: non-cardiologists are poor at diagnosing systolic murmurs
|
|
|
Clinical bottom line (level 2a)
-
Cardiologists were good at diagnosing systolic murmurs (unlike non-cardiologists), though they do not agree well about the signs.
-
Systolic murmurs were common and most were benign.
-
Aortic stenosis:
- was diagnosed by effort syncope, a slow rising carotid pulse, a late peak in the murmur and a reduced second heart sounds
- was ruled out by brachioradial delay, apical-radial delay, no murmur, no radiation to the right carotid, and no fourth heart sound
- a scoring system helped diagnose aortic stenosis
-
Mitral regurgitation:
- is made more likely if the murmur is in the mitral area, the murmur increases with transient arterial occlusion or if a murmur occurs after an acute MI
- is ruled out if there is no late or pansystolic murmur
- interns guess the diagnosis of mitral regurgitation
-
Tricuspid regurgitation:
- was well diagnosed by cardiologists listening for the murmur
- was ruled in by an increase in the murmur on sustained abdominal pressure, or on inspiration
- was ruled out if there is no increase in murmur intensity on inspiration
-
Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy:
- was ruled in if murmur intensity decreases on passive leg elevation, or stays the same or decreases on squatting
- was ruled out if murmur intensity increases on squatting, or stays the same or increases on passive leg elevation
-
Mitral valve prolapse:
- was ruled in if a cardiologist hears a systolic click and a murmur, or a click alone
- was ruled out if a cardiologist hears no click or murmur
- was poorly diagnosed by non-cardiologists
- indicates a poor prognosis if the murmur is pansystolic
|
|
Etchells et al:
Journal of the American Medical Association
1997;
277 (7):
564-571
|
Expires
July 2004
|
The study
Systematic review of all
of
Patients: aged 62-100 years old
Outcome: diagnosis of murmurs
Articles found in English
using ?, 1966-1996
(search terms: not detailed
)
Selection criteria: as above
Appraisal criteria: not detailed
Articles excluded if:
it is unclear how many studies were included
The evidence
| diagnostic test |
with |
without |
LR+ (95% CI) |
LR- (95% CI) |
| effort syncope |
|
|
inf
(1.3 to
inf)
|
0.76
(0.67 to
0.86)
|
| slow rise of carotid pulse |
|
|
130
(33 to
560)
|
0.62
(0.51 to
0.75)
|
| maximum peak murmur intensity late |
|
|
101
(25 to
410)
|
0.31
(0.22 to
0.44)
|
| decreased intensity/absent second heart sound |
|
|
50
(24 to
100)
|
0.45
(0.34 to
0.58)
|
| fourth heart sound |
|
|
2.5
(2.1 to
3.0)
|
0.26
(0.14 to
0.49)
|
| any murmur |
|
|
2.4
(2.2 to
2.7)
|
0.0
(0.0 to
0.13)
|
| radiation to right carotid |
|
|
1.4
(1.3 to
1.5)
|
0.10
(0.13 to
0.40)
|
| apical-carotid delay |
|
|
inf
(2.4 to
inf)
|
0.05
(0.01 to
0.31)
|
| brachioradial delay |
|
|
6.8
(3.2 to
14)
|
0.0
(0.0 to
0.3)
|
| mitral regurgitation: murmur in mitral area |
|
|
3.9
(3.0 to
5.1)
|
0.34
(0.23 to
0.47)
|
| mitral regurgitation: late/pansystolic murmur |
|
|
1.8
(1.2 to
2.5)
|
0.0
(0.0 to
0.8)
|
| mitral regurgitation: any murmur following an acute MI |
|
|
4.7
(1.3 to
11)
|
0.66
(0.25 to
1.00)
|
| mitral regurgitation: transient arterial occlusion causing increased murmur intensity |
|
|
7.5
(2.5 to
23)
|
0.28
(0.18 to
0.60)
|
| tricuspid regurgitation: moderate-severe TR diagnosis in patients referred for echocardiogram |
|
|
10.1
(5.8 to
18)
|
0.41
(0.24 to
0.70)
|
| tricuspid regurgitation: increased murmur intensity on inspiration |
|
|
8.0
(3.5 to
18)
|
0.0
(0.0 to
0.43)
|
| tricuspid regurgitation: increased murmur intensity on sustained abdominal pressure |
|
|
inf
(2.5 to
inf)
|
0.33
(0.15 to
0.58)
|
| hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: decreased murmur intensity on passive leg elevation |
|
|
8.0
(3.0 to
21)
|
0.22
(0.06 to
0.77)
|
| hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: no change or decrease in murmur intensity on squatting |
|
|
4.5
(2.3 to
86)
|
0.13
(0.02 to
0.81)
|
| mitral valve prolapse: systolic click and murmur |
|
|
19
(4.6 to
86)
|
2.4
(1.0 to
5.7)
|
| mitral valve prolapse: systolic click |
|
|
12
(5.4 to
25)
|
1.3
(0.7 to
2.2)
|
| mitral valve prolapse: no ejection click +/- murmur |
|
|
3.8
(2.3 to
6.8)
|
( to
)
|
| mitral valve prolapse: murmur only |
|
|
2.4
(1.0 to
5.7)
|
0.7
(0.3 to
1.3)
|
| mitral valve prolapse: no murmur or click |
|
|
0.04
(0.02 to
0.11)
|
0.53
(0.23 to
1.2)
|
| total |
|
|
- pre-test probability: young- 5-50% systolic murmurs: 86%+ normal
- pre-test probability: old- 30-60% systolic murmurs: 44%+ normal
- precision for cardiologists Kinterobserver:
- Cardiologist's diagnosis:
- abnormal murmur: LR (95% CI): inf (14 to inf)
- possibly abnormal murmur: LR (95% CI): 2.3 (0.7 to 5.9)
- normal: LR (95% CI): 0.0 (0.0 to 0.4)
- variable and point score (maximum 14):
- reduced carotid volume- 2
- slow rate of rise of carotid pulse- 3
- murmur loudest at second right intercostal space- 2
- decreased intensity/absent second heart sound- 3
- aortic stenosis points score:
- 14: LR (95% CI): inf (0.6 to inf)
- 10-13: LR (95% CI): 8.0 (1.6 to 46)
- 7-9: LR (95% CI): 2.7 (1.0 to 8.0)
- 2-6: LR (95% CI): 0.27 (0.15 to 0.49)
- 0: LR (95% CI): 0.10 (0.01 to 0.58)
- mitral regurgitation:
- detected by interns: LR+ 1.1; LR- 1.0
- detected by students: LR 4.6; LR- ?
- mitral valve prolapse:
- pansystolic murmur: LR (adverse outcome) (95% CI): 5.1 (2.2 to 9.9)
- no click or murmur: LR (adverse outcome) (95% CI): 0.0 (0.0 to 4.1)
- adverse outcome: death, stroke, endocarditis, progressive MR requiring surgery
Comments
- Transient arterial occlusion: a blood pressure cuff around both arms simultaneously inflated to 20-40 mmHg >systolic blood pressure. Check murmur intensity 20 seconds later.
- Sustained abdominal pressure: patient relaxes and breathes through open mouth. Place palm of hand on midabdomen and push at pressure 20-35 mmHg for 15-30 seconds.
- Most papers looking at the performance of cardiologists- non-cardiologists are noticeably less good.
Citation
-
Etchells
E,
Bell
C,
Robb
K, et al:
Does this patient have an abnormal systolic murmur?.
Journal of the American Medical Association
1997;
277 (7):
564-571
Contributor: Chris Ball and Musab Hayatli,
July 2000
Reviewer:
Clinical Question.
| Patient |
62-100 years old |
| Intervention or Exposure |
diagnosis |
| Outcome |
murmurs |
|
|