A systematic review of pocket-sized imaging devices: small and mighty?

Galusko, Victor; Ionescu, Adrian

doi:10.1530/erp-18-0030

Cited by 16 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…None yet include spectral Doppler capability, so they are not fully capable of performing advanced CCE. These handheld echocardiography devices may prove a useful tool both for experts and novices, but studies are needed to fully clarify their potential [106,107]. As high-quality handheld devices gain acceptance, it is reasonable to expect that the use of echocardiography will spread further not only in ICUs but also in the pre-hospital, perioperative and emergency department settings.…”

Section: New Technologies and Their Applications In The Critical Carementioning

confidence: 99%

A decade of progress in critical care echocardiography: a narrative review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: This narrative review focusing on critical care echocardiography (CCE) has been written by a group of experts in the field, with the aim of outlining the state of the art in CCE in the 10 years after its official recognition and definition. Results: In the last 10 years, CCE has become an essential branch of critical care ultrasonography and has gained general acceptance. Its use, both as a diagnostic tool and for hemodynamic monitoring, has increased markedly, influencing contemporary cardiorespiratory management. Recent studies suggest that the use of CCE may have a positive impact on outcomes. CCE may be used in critically ill patients in many different clinical situations, both in their early evaluation of in the emergency department and during intensive care unit (ICU) admission and stay. CCE has also proven its utility in perioperative settings, as well as in the management of mechanical circulatory support. CCE may be performed with very simple diagnostic objectives. This application, referred to as basic CCE, does not require a high level of training. Advanced CCE, on the other hand, uses ultrasonography for full evaluation of cardiac function and hemodynamics, and requires extensive training, with formal certification now available. Indeed, recent years have seen the creation of worldwide certification in advanced CCE. While transthoracic CCE remains the most commonly used method, the transesophageal route has gained importance, particularly for intubated and ventilated patients. Conclusion: CCE is now widely accepted by the critical care community as a valuable tool in the ICU and emergency department, and in perioperative settings.

show abstract

Section: New Technologies and Their Applications In The Critical Carementioning

confidence: 99%

A decade of progress in critical care echocardiography: a narrative review

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This review was limited to the abdominal and pleural applications of hand-held ultrasound. In another systematic review by Galusko et al they examined studies related to the echocardiographic use of hand-held ultrasound devices [36]. A total of 25 studies were included for analysis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…While numerous HUDs are available, two systematic reviews on diagnostic performance and reproducibility have been limited to Vscan (GE) and Lumify (Phillips) devices, which are more expensive handheld ultrasound devices. 13 , 14 Newer HUD devices, such as the Butterfly iQ+, use modern microchip technology to generate and detect ultrasound waves. The cost is reduced by more than 50% by substituting traditional piezoelectric elements with capacitive micromachined ultrasound transducers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

A systematic review of pocket-sized imaging devices: small and mighty?

Cited by 16 publications

References 46 publications

A decade of progress in critical care echocardiography: a narrative review

A decade of progress in critical care echocardiography: a narrative review

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

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About