Pocket-size imaging devices allow for reliable bedside screening for femoral artery access site complications

Integrated Assessment of Heart, Lung and Lower Extremity Veins Using Hand-Held Ultrasound Device in COVID-19 Patients: Feasibility and Clinical Application

The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic caused a significant shortage of medical personnel and the prioritization of life-saving procedures on internal medicine and cardiology wards. Thus, the cost- and time-effectiveness of each procedure proved vital. Implementing elements of imaging diagnostics into the physical examination of COVID-19 patients could prove beneficial to the treatment process, providing important clinical data at the moment of admission. Sixty-three patients with positive COVID-19 test results were enrolled into our study and underwent physical examination expanded with a handheld ultrasound device (HUD)-performed bedside assessment included: right ventricle measurement, visual and automated LVEF assessment, four-point compression ultrasound test (CUS) of lower extremities and lung ultrasound. Routine testing consisting of computed-tomography chest scanning, CT-pulmonary angiogram and full echocardiography performed on a high-end stationary device was completed in the following 24 h. Lung abnormalities characteristic for COVID-19 were detected in CT in 53 (84%) patients. The sensitivity and specificity of bedside HUD examination for detecting lung pathologies was 0.92 and 0.90, respectively. Increased number of B-lines had a sensitivity of 0.81, specificity 0.83 for the ground glass symptom in CT examination (AUC 0.82; p < 0.0001); pleural thickening sensitivity 0.95, specificity 0.88 (AUC 0.91, p < 0.0001); lung consolidations sensitivity 0.71, specificity 0.86 (AUC 0.79, p < 0.0001). In 20 patients (32%), pulmonary embolism was confirmed. RV was dilated in HUD examination in 27 patients (43%), CUS was positive in two patients. During HUD examination, software-derived LV function analysis failed to measure LVEF in 29 (46%) cases. HUD proved its potential as the first-line modality for the collection of heart-lung-vein imaging information among patients with severe COVID-19. HUD-derived diagnosis was especially effective for the initial assessment of lung involvement. Expectedly, in this group of patients with high prevalence of severe pneumonia, HUD-diagnosed RV enlargement had moderate predictive value and the option to simultaneously detect lower limb venous thrombosis was clinically attractive. Although most of the LV images were suitable for the visual assessment of LVEF, an AI-enhanced software algorithm failed in almost 50% of the study population.

Artificial Intelligence-Powered Measurement of Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Using a Handheld Ultrasound Device

The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of an algorithm for automated measurement of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) available on handheld ultrasound devices (HUDs). One hundred twelve patients admitted to the cardiology department underwent assessment performed with an HUD. In each case, the four-chamber apical view was obtained, and LVEF was calculated with LVivo software. Subsequently, during the examination performed with the use of the stationary echocardiograph, the 3-D measurement of LVEF was recorded. The average LVEFs measured with LVivo and the 3-D reference method were 46 ± 14% and 48 ± 14%, respectively. The correlation between the measurements obtained with the HUD and 3-D evaluation was high (r = 0.92, 95% confidence interval: 0.87-0.95, p < 0.0001). The mean difference between the LVEF obtained with LVivo and the 3-D LVEF was not significant (mean difference: -0.61%, 95% confidence interval: -1.89 to 0.68, p = 0.31). The LVivo software despite its limitations is capable of the accurate LVEF measurement when the acquired views are of at least good imaging quality.

Hand-Held Ultrasound Devices Compared with High-End Ultrasound Systems: A Systematic Review

The aim of this study was to review the scientific literature available on the comparison of hand-held ultrasound devices with high-end systems for abdominal and pleural applications. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane were searched following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Original research describing hand-held ultrasound devices compared with high-end systems was included and assessed using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2. The search was limited to articles published since 1 January 2012. A total of 2486 articles were found and screened by title and abstract. A total of 16 articles were chosen for final review. All of the included articles showed good overall agreement between hand-held and high-end ultrasound systems. Strong correlations were found when evaluating ascites, hydronephrosis, pleural cavities, in detection of abdominal aortic aneurysms and for use with obstetric and gynaecological patients. Other articles found good agreement for cholelithiasis and for determining the best site for paracentesis. QUADAS-2 analysis suggested few risks of bias and almost no concerns regarding applicability. For distinct clinical questions, hand-held devices may be a valuable supplement to physical examination. However, evidence is inadequate, and more research is needed on the abdominal and pleural use of hand-held ultrasound with more standardised comparisons, using only blinded reviewers.

Brief cardiovascular imaging with pocket-size ultrasound devices improves the accuracy of the initial assessment of suspected pulmonary embolism

Pulmonary embolism onset is frequently neglected due to the non-specific character of its symptoms. Pocket-size imaging devices (PSID) present an opportunity to implement imaging diagnostics into conventional physical examination. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that supplementation of the initial bedside assessment of patients with suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) with four-point compression venous ultrasonography (CUS) and right ventricular size assessment with the use of PSID equipped with dual probe could positively influence the accuracy of clinical predictions. A single-centre, prospective analysis was conducted on 100 patients (47 men, mean age 68 ± 13 years) with suspected PE. Clinical assessment on the basis of Wells and revised Geneva score and physical examination were supplemented with CUS and RV measurements by PSID. The mean time of PSID scanning was 4.9 ± 0.8 min and was universally accepted by the patients. Fifteen patients had deep venous thrombosis and RV enlargement was observed in 59 patients. PE was confirmed in 24 patients. If the both CUS was positive and RV enlarged, the specificity was 100% and sensitivity 54%, ROC AUC 0.771 [95% CI 0.68-0.85]. The Wells rule within our study population had the specificity of 86% and sensitivity of 67%, ROC AUC 0.776 (95% CI 0.681-0.853, p < 0.0001). Similar values calculated for the revised Geneva score were as follows: specificity 58% and sensitivity 63%, ROC AUC 0.664 (95% CI 0.563-0.756, p = 0.0104). Supplementing the revised Geneva score with additional criteria of CUS result and RV measurement resulted in significant improvement of diagnostic accuracy. The difference between ROC AUCs was 0.199 (95% Cl 0.0893-0.308, p = 0.0004). Similar modification of Wells score increased ROC AUC by 0.133 (95% CI 0.0443-0.223, p = 0.0034). Despite the well-acknowledged role of the PE clinical risk assessment scores the diagnostic process may benefit from the addition of basic bedside ultrasonographic techniques.

Bedside screening with the use of pocket-size imaging device can be useful for ruling out carotid artery stenosis in patients scheduled for cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

Patients (pts) scheduled for coronary artery bypass grafting, burdened with high risk of carotid stenosis, are recommended to undergo duplex ultrasonography (DUS) of carotid arteries.

PURPOSE

To validate pocket-size imaging device (PSID) equipped with linear probe as an easily accessible tool enabling bedside screening for carotid artery stenosis (CAS).

METHODS

A total of 100 pts (60 men, mean age 69±11 years) with multivessel coronary artery disease underwent bedside DUS of carotid arteries with the use of PSID performed by a cardiology resident trained in DUS. Subsequently, DUS with the use of stationary high-end ultrasound system was performed in all pts to verify findings of PSID examination.

RESULTS

Initial diagnosis of atherosclerotic plaque presence obtained with PSID in 59 patients was confirmed by high-end ultrasound system examination in all cases. There was a statistically significant correlation of intima-media thickness measurements between PSID and stationary system (r=.58; 95% CI: 0.48-0.66; P<.0001), but the coefficient of agreement (κ) between the two methods in classification of intima-media as normal or thickened (>0.9 mm) was only .38 (95% CI: 0.299-0.459). During PSID examination, turbulent flow was observed in 21 pts-CAS was confirmed in all these pts-5 pts were diagnosed with significant CAS, the rest with CAS ranging from 30% to 70%.

CONCLUSIONS

Pocket-size imaging device equipped with linear probe allows for identification of patients with atherosclerotic plaques and turbulent flow in carotid arteries; however, the degree of CAS cannot be reliably determined. The measurement accuracy of intima-media thickness is insufficient for a diagnostic purpose.