Performance of a Handheld Ultrasound Device to Assess Articular and Periarticular Pathologies in Patients with Inflammatory Arthritis

Comparison of 6 handheld ultrasound devices by point-of-care ultrasound experts: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has emerged as an essential bedside tool for clinicians, but lack of access to ultrasound equipment has been a top barrier to POCUS use. Recently, several handheld ultrasound devices ("handhelds") have become available, and clinicians are seeking data to guide purchasing decisions. Few comparative studies of different handhelds have been done. We conducted a cross-sectional study comparing 6 handhelds readily available in the United States (Butterfly iQ + ™ by Butterfly Network Inc.; Clarius™ by Clarius Mobile Health; Kosmos™ by EchoNous; TE Air™ by Mindray; Vscan Air™ SL and CL by General Electric; and Lumify™ by Philips Healthcare). A multi-specialty group of physician POCUS experts (n = 35) acquired three standard ultrasound views (abdominal right upper quadrant, cardiac apical 4-chamber, and superficial neck and lung views) in random order on the same standardized patients and rated the image quality. Afterward, a final survey of the overall ease of use, image quality, and satisfaction of each handheld was completed.

RESULTS

Thirty-five POCUS experts specializing in internal medicine/hospital medicine, critical care, emergency medicine, and nephrology acquired and rated right upper quadrant, apical 4-chamber, and superficial neck and lung views with 6 different handhelds. For image quality, the highest-rated handhelds were Vscan Air™ for the right upper quadrant view, Mindray TE Air™ for the cardiac apical 4-chamber view, and Lumify™ for superficial views of the neck and lung. Overall satisfaction with image quality was highest with Vscan Air™, Lumify™, and Mindray, while overall satisfaction with ease of use was highest with Vscan Air™. The 5 most desirable characteristics of handhelds were image quality, ease of use, portability, probe size, and battery life. Ultimately, all 6 handhelds had notable advantages and disadvantages, with no single device having all desired qualities or features.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall satisfaction with image quality was rated highest with Vscan Air™, Lumify™, and Mindray TE Air™when acquiring right upper quadrant, apical 4-chamber, and superficial neck and lung views. No single handheld was perceived to be superior in image quality for all views. Vscan Air™ was rated highest for overall ease of use and was the most preferred handheld for purchase by POCUS experts.

Using Ultrasound to Improve Diagnostic Confidence and Management of Psoriatic Disease: Highlights From the GRAPPA 2023 Ultrasound Workshop

The sensitivity of ultrasound (US) to detect, characterize, and monitor the relevant pathologies of psoriatic arthritis (PsA), including synovitis, enthesitis, tenosynovitis, and dactylitis, has made it an attractive tool for informing clinical decisions. The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) US working group ran 2 sessions during the annual GRAPPA meeting held in July 2023 in Dublin, Ireland. During the first workshop, the group presented 2 topics, followed by a live demonstration and a group discussion. The 2 topics were (1) an overview of the Diagnostic Ultrasound Enthesitis Tool (DUET) enthesitis scoring methodology, and (2) small hand-held probes-will the promise deliver? The live demonstration that followed compared the performance of 2 hand-held US (HHUS) devices vs a console US machine in patients with PsA, and the interactive group discussion considered gaps in the literature and future research suggestions relating to HHUS and its application in psoriatic disease. During the second session, the US working group provided further updates regarding the GRAPPA US studies currently underway or recently completed.

Comparing New Smartphone-Connected Handheld Ultrasound Device vs. Traditional Ultrasound in Vitreo-Retinal Disease Diagnosis

(1) Background: Ocular emergencies account for 1.5-3% of emergency department (ED) visits and require urgent diagnosis to prevent serious complications. Ultrasonography is a crucial, non-invasive diagnostic tool for these conditions but traditionally lacks portability and integration with modern electronic smart devices. The purpose of this study was to assess the accuracy and performance of a new handheld ultrasound device in comparison to a conventional cart-based sonographic machine in patients attending to the ED for vitreo-retinal diseases. (2) Methods: three specialists in ophthalmology, with at least 4-year experience in vitreo-retinal diseases and eye ultrasound, evaluated images of 50 eyes with both portable and traditional ultrasound probes. Each specialist made the diagnosis based on the images captured with both probes and then rated their overall image quality and confidence of diagnosis with a five-point Likert scale. The concordance of diagnosis between the two probes was evaluated. (3) Results: The sample comprised 42 patients. Twenty (40%) healthy eyes and thirty eyes with the following vitreo-retinal interface conditions were examined: 12 retinal detachment (24%), 8 vitreous hemorrhage (16%), and 10 posterior vitreous detachment (20%). The overall accuracy of the two devices appeared to be comparable (70.7% vs. 69.3%). The Butterfly iQ+ probe showed similar sensitivity in retinal detachment diagnosis (91.7% vs. 94.4% of the Accutome B-scan Pro), while it showed poor performance in diagnosing posterior vitreous detachment (sensitivity = 27.2%); (4) Conclusions: The Butterfly iQ+ device demonstrated high sensitivity in the diagnosis of retinal detachment. Significant adjustments are still needed to improve the resolution of the vitreous body.

Handheld Ultrasound Devices Used by Newly Certified Operators for Pneumonia in the Emergency Department-A Diagnostic Accuracy Study

The diagnostic accuracy of handheld ultrasound (HHUS) devices operated by newly certified operators for pneumonia is unknown. This multicenter diagnostic accuracy study included patients prospectively suspected of pneumonia from February 2021 to February 2022 in four emergency departments. The index test was a 14-zone focused lung ultrasound (FLUS) examination, with consolidation with air bronchograms as diagnostic criteria for pneumonia. FLUS examinations were performed by newly certified operators using HHUS. The reference standard was computed tomography (CT) and expert diagnosis using all medical records. The sensitivity and specificity of FLUS and chest X-ray (CXR) were compared using McNemar's test. Of the 324 scanned patients, 212 (65%) had pneumonia, according to the expert diagnosis. FLUS had a sensitivity of 31% (95% CI 26-36) and a specificity of 82% (95% CI 78-86) compared with the experts' diagnosis. Compared with CT, FLUS had a sensitivity of 32% (95% CI 27-37) and specificity of 81% (95% CI 77-85). CXR had a sensitivity of 66% (95% CI 61-72) and a specificity of 76% (95% CI 71-81) compared with the experts' diagnosis. Compared with CT, CXR had a sensitivity of 69% (95% CI 63-74) and a specificity of 68% (95% CI 62-72). Compared with the experts' diagnosis and CT diagnosis, FLUS performed by newly certified operators using HHUS devices had a significantly lower sensitivity for pneumonia when compared to CXR (p < 0.001). FLUS had a significantly higher specificity than CXR using CT diagnosis as a reference standard (p = 0.02). HHUS exhibited low sensitivity for pneumonia when used by newly certified operators.

Performance of a handheld point of care ultrasonography to assess IUD position compared to conventional transvaginal ultrasonography

OBJECTIVE

To compare the performance of the abdominal handheld point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS) Butterfly-iQ to gold standard transvaginal ultrasonography (US) in identifying the position of intrauterine devices (IUDs) in the hands of a medical doctor specialised in ultrasonography.

METHODS

In this diagnostic accuracy study, a single operator conducted abdominal POCUS followed by conventional transvaginal US. Seventy patients utilising copper or hormonal IUDs were assessed between June 2021 and October 2022. IUDs were categorised as entirely within the uterine cavity or malpositioned. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were calculated for detecting malpositioned IUDs, with conventional US results serving as the reference standard. Concordance rate and Kappa coefficient were computed to assess the agreement between the two ultrasound modalities.

RESULTS

Among the 70 patients, 46 (65.7%) used copper IUDs, and 24 (34.3%) used hormonal IUDs. Conventional transvaginal US showed IUDs entirely within the uterine cavity in 56 (80%) patients and 14 (20%) IUDs were malpositioned. Of the 14 malpositioned IUDs seen by conventional US, POCUS identified 13 demonstrating a sensitivity of 92.9% (66.1-99.8). Of the 56 IUDs entirely within the uterine cavity shown by conventional US, only two cases were considered malpositioned by POCUS demonstrating a specificity of 96.4% (87.7-99.6). The concordance rate was 95.7%, and the Kappa value was 0.87 in differentiating between IUDs entirely within the uterine cavity and those that were malpositioned.

CONCLUSION

Abdominal POCUS using Butterfly-iQ, when administered by an imaging specialist, exhibited excellent performance in confirming IUDs entirely within the uterine cavity.

The Performance Characteristics of Handheld, Non-Piezoelectric Point-of-Care Ultrasound (POCUS) in the Emergency Department

The use of handheld point-of-care ultrasound (HH-POCUS) platforms is rapidly increasing, but the diagnostic performance of HH-POCUS in the emergency department (ED) has not been well-studied. For a period of one year, only a HH-POCUS system that uses a non-piezoelectric array (Butterfly iQ+™) was available for clinical POCUS examinations in our ED. We performed a retrospective observational study of patients who underwent cardiac, thoracic, renal, biliary, or lower extremity venous (DVT) examinations from November 2021-November 2022 and calculated performance characteristics of HH-POCUS relative to radiology imaging. A total of 381 HH-POCUS studies were evaluated. Cardiac image quality was significantly lower than lung (p = 0.002). Over half of the studies (213/381) had imaging available for comparison, and HH-POCUS identified 86.5% (32/37, (95%CI) 70.4-94.9) of prespecified emergent diagnoses, including acute cholecystitis, severely reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, pericardial effusion or tamponade, moderate or larger pleural effusion, pneumothorax, moderate or larger hydronephrosis, and DVT. For less emergent diagnoses, 84.3% (43/51, (95%CI) 70.9-92.5) were identified. Overall, HH-POCUS using a non-piezoelectric array showed modest real-world performance in the ED for cardiac, thoracic, renal, biliary, and DVT examinations. HH-POCUS may be inadequate to rule out some common ED diagnoses, but had good specificity for certain conditions such as pericardial effusion.

Application of clinical and molecular profiling data to improve patient outcomes in psoriatic arthritis

Achieving a good outcome for a person with Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) is made difficult by late diagnosis, heterogenous clinical disease expression and in many cases, failure to adequately suppress inflammatory disease features. Single-centre studies have certainly contributed to our understanding of disease pathogenesis, but to adequately address the major areas of unmet need, multi-partner, collaborative research programmes are now required. HIPPOCRATES is a 5-year, Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI) programme which includes 17 European academic centres experienced in PsA research, 5 pharmaceutical industry partners, 3 small-/medium-sized industry partners and 2 patient-representative organizations. In this review, the ambitious programme of work to be undertaken by HIPPOCRATES is outlined and common approaches and challenges are identified. It is expected that, when completed, the results will ultimately allow for changes in the approaches to diagnosing, managing and treating PsA allowing for better short-term and long-term outcomes.

A Cadaveric Study Examining the Accuracy of Wireless Hand-Held Guided Ultrasound Injections Versus Blind Injections in the Flexor Tendon Sheath

Purpose

Hand-held ultrasound (HHUS) is gaining popularity among clinicians. Although its use for procedural guidance could have several advantages in hand surgery, other surgeons may wonder about its added benefits. This cadaveric study aimed to examine the hypothesis of increased accuracy of wireless HHUS-guided injections versus that of blind injections into the flexor sheath.

Methods

Our series included 20 fresh cadaveric hands with 80 fingers randomly assigned to 2 groups. In group A, 10 hands were randomly assigned to receive a landmark injection and then received a blinded injection to the flexor tendon sheath (FTS). In group B, 10 hands were blinded in the same manner and received an ultrasound-guided injection with HHUS. Methylene blue was injected, and anatomic dissection was performed to evaluate the injection accuracy based on the dye's filling pattern in the FTS as stage I (no filling), stage II (<50% filling), and stage III (>50% filling). Statistical analysis was performed, and P <.05 indicated a significant difference.

Results

One finger was excluded because of severe Dupuytren contracture. In group A, 39 blind injections of the FTS were performed, with 82% (32/39) fingers achieving stage III filling. In group B, 40 ultrasound-guided FTS injections were performed, with 90% (36/40) of fingers achieving stage III filing. Our study did not reveal any superiority in accuracy when ultrasound guidance was used (P = .35).

Conclusions

Hand-held ultrasound-guided FTS injections were not more accurate than blind injections performed by an experienced hand surgeon. These findings suggest that blind injections can be used as routine practice when performed by experienced operators to treat trigger finger. However, the use of HHUS may offer other advantages in hand surgery practice.

Clinical relevance

Ultimately, choosing to perform HHUS-guided injection versus blind injection to treat trigger finger depends on the surgeon's experience and preference for a particular technique.

Physicians' perceptions of the daily use of a handheld ultrasound device in the labor room

OBJECTIVE

The objective of our study was to describe the perception of physicians who use a handheld ultrasound (US) device in an intensive perinatal care unit.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective observational study in the labor ward of an intensive perinatal care unit between November 2021 and May 2022. Obstetrics & Gynecology residents in rotation in our department during this time were recruited as participants in this study. All the participants were provided with a handheld US device Vscan Air™ (GE Healthcare, Zipf, Austria) to use during their normal days and nights practice in labor ward. At the end of their 6 months rotation, participants completed an anonymous surveys about their perceptions of the handheld US device. The survey included questions about the ease of use in clinical situations, the amount of time of initial diagnosis, performances of the device, feasibility to use, and patient's satisfaction with the use of the device.

RESULTS

6 residents in their last year of residency were included. All the participants were satisfied with the device and would like to use it in their future practice. They all agreed that the probe was easy to handle and that the mobile application was easy to use. Image quality was always considered good by the participants and 5/6 of them declared that the handheld US device was always sufficient and did not require any confirmation with a conventional US machine. 5/6 of the participants considered that the handheld US device allowed them to gain time for clinical decision but half of them did not estimate that the use of the handheld US device improved their ability to make a clinical diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that the Vscan Air™ is easy to use, with a good quality image and reduces the amount of time to make a clinical diagnosis. Handheld US device could be useful in the daily practice in maternity hospital.

Prospective double-blind study on the value of musculoskeletal ultrasound by dermatologists as a screening instrument for psoriatic arthritis

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSUS) use by dermatologists previously trained on a novel handheld, chip-based ultrasound device (HHUD) to screen for early PsA.

METHODS

Twelve dermatologists were recruited to screen psoriasis patients for PsA using the novel HHUD in one major hospital in Bonn (Germany) and six private practices in surrounding regions. Patient screening was based on medical history, clinical examination, and the GEPARD questionnaire paired with an MSUS examination of up to three painful joints. All screened patients were then referred to rheumatologists, who determined the final diagnosis. The screening effect of MSUS was assessed according to its sensitivity and specificity before and after its application.

RESULTS

Between 1 October 2020 and 26 May 2021, a total of 140 psoriasis patients with arthralgia participated in this study. PsA was diagnosed in 19 (13.6%) cases. Before applying MSUS, dermatologists' screening sensitivity and specificity were recorded as 88.2% and 54.4%, respectively, while after applying MSUS the sensitivity and specificity changed to 70.6% and 90.4%, respectively. MSUS led to a change of PsA suspicion in 46 cases, with PsA no longer being suspected in 45 of them.

CONCLUSION

This study was able to demonstrate that PsA screening using MSUS by previously trained dermatologists can lead to more precise PsA detection and potentially decreased rheumatologist referral rates.

Detection of joint involvement in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus using musculoskeletal ultrasound and its correlation with disease activity

Background

Musculoskeletal symptoms are common and could be the first presenting symptom in up to 50% of systemic lupus erythematosus patients, and they affect more than 95% of patients during the clinical course. The present study aimed to assess joint involvement in the wrists, hands, and knees of SLE patients using musculoskeletal ultrasonography and to correlate these findings with disease activity.

The study enrolled 40 Patients with SLE who were attending the Immunology outpatient clinic and internal medicine department of Beni-Suef University Hospital and 20 age and sex nearly matched healthy controls who have no rheumatological complaints. Participants had a comprehensive physical examination, series of laboratory tests, functional assessment by Health Assessment Questionnaire score, disease activity assessment of by European Consensus Lupus Activity score, and radiological examination by high-resolution Ultrasound machine called (LOGIC P 9) using a gray-scale US mode (13–18 MHz) with Power Doppler to detect joint synovitis, synovial hypertrophy, bone erosions and or tenosynovitis.

Results

There was a statistically significant prevalence of US abnormality of knee joints in both asymptomatic and symptomatic cases versus controls contrary to the wrist and hand US abnormality. The presence of SLE increases the risk of US abnormalities in knee joints 28 times more than controls also increasing the age of the patient one year increase the probability of getting abnormal findings in the knee joint by 1.156 times. While the only independent variable that can affect US abnormal findings in the wrist joint is the increase in Systolic Blood Pressure 1 mmHg with 1.06 times.

Conclusion

Musculoskeletal Ultrasound with applied Power Doppler is a good tool for the detection of early affection of joints either in symptomatic or asymptomatic SLE patients.

Comparison of four handheld point-of-care ultrasound devices by expert users

Background

Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is rapidly becoming ubiquitous across healthcare specialties. This is due to several factors including its portability, immediacy of results to guide clinical decision-making, and lack of radiation exposure to patients. The recent growth of handheld ultrasound devices has improved access to ultrasound for many clinicians. Few studies have directly compared different handheld ultrasound devices among themselves or to cart-based ultrasound machines. We conducted a prospective observational study comparing four common handheld ultrasound devices for ease of use, image quality, and overall satisfaction. Twenty-four POCUS experts utilized four handheld devices (Butterfly iQ+™ by Butterfly Network Inc., Kosmos™ by EchoNous, Vscan Air™ by General Electric, and Lumify™ by Philips Healthcare) to obtain three ultrasound views on the same standardized patients using high- and low-frequency probes.

Results

Data were collected from 24 POCUS experts using all 4 handheld devices. No single ultrasound device was superior in all categories. For overall ease of use, the Vscan Air™ was rated highest, followed by the Lumify™. For overall image quality, Lumify™ was rated highest, followed by Kosmos™. The Lumify™ device was rated highest for overall satisfaction, while the Vscan Air™ was rated as the most likely to be purchased personally and carried in one’s coat pocket. The top 5 characteristics of handheld ultrasound devices rated as being “very important” were image quality, ease of use, portability, total costs, and availability of different probes.

Conclusions

In a comparison of four common handheld ultrasound devices in the United States, no single handheld ultrasound device was perceived to have all desired characteristics. POCUS experts rated the Lumify™ highest for image quality and Vscan Air™ highest for ease of use. Overall satisfaction was highest with the Lumify™ device, while the most likely to be purchased as a pocket device was the Vscan Air™. Image quality was felt to be the most important characteristic in evaluating handheld ultrasound devices.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13089-022-00274-6.

Abdominal aorta measurements by a handheld ultrasound device compared with a conventional cart-based ultrasound machine

BACKGROUND

Ultraportable or pocket handheld ultrasound devices (HUD) may be useful for large-scale abdominal aortic aneurysm screening. However, the reproducibility of measurements has not been compared with conventional cart-based ultrasound machines.

OBJECTIVES

Investigate the intra- and inter-operator reproducibility of a HUD compared with a conventional ultrasound machine for aortic screening.

DESIGN

Analytical, cross-sectional.

SETTING

Ultrasound department at a large tertiary care hospital in Riyadh.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible male participants aged ≥60 years were invited to participate upon arriving for a non-vascular ultrasound appointment. Three repeated anteroposterior measurements of the transverse aorta were made at the proximal and distal locations for each machine before repeating the measurements on a subset of participants by a second blinded operator. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and the Bland-Altman method were used to analyze reproducibility.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Inter-system and intra- and inter-operator ICCs.

SAMPLE SIZE

114 males with repeated measurements by second operator on a subset of 35 participants.

RESULTS

The median age (interquartile range) of participants was 68 years (62-74 years). The intra- and inter-operator ICCs were all >0.800 showing almost perfect agreement except for the inter-operator reproducibility at the proximal location using a conventional machine (ICC= 0.583, P=.007) and the Butterfly device (ICC=0.467, P=.037). The inter-system ICCs (95% CI) were 0.818 (0.736-0.874) and 0.879 (0.799-0.924) at the proximal and distal locations, respectively. The mean difference in aortic measurement between the ultrasound systems was 0.3 mm (1.7%) in the proximal location and 0.6 mm (3.6%) in the distal location. In total, >91% of the difference in measurements between the machines was <3 mm. The mean scanning time was 4:16 minutes for the conventional system and 3:53 minutes for the HUD (P=.34).

CONCLUSIONS

Abdominal aortic screening using a HUD was feasible and reliable compared with a conventional ultrasound machine. A pocket HUD should be considered for large-scale screening.

LIMITATIONS

No cases of abdominal aortic aneurysm in the sample and lack of blinding.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

None.