Assessment of the renal collecting system using a pocket-sized ultrasound device

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.

Prospective Comparison of Handheld Ultrasound Devices from Different Manufacturers with Respect to B-Scan Quality and Clinical Significance for Various Abdominal Sonography Questions

BACKGROUND

Handheld ultrasound (HHUS) devices have chiefly been deployed in emergency medicine, where they are considered a valid tool. The data situation is less clear in the case of internal questions in abdominal sonography. In our study, we investigate whether HHUS devices from different manufacturers differ in their B-scan quality, and whether any differences are relevant for the significance of an internal ultrasound examination.

METHOD

The study incorporated eight HHUS devices from different manufacturers. Ultrasound videos of seven defined sonographic questions were recorded with all of the devices. The analogue recording of the same findings with a conventional high-end ultrasound (HEUS) device served as an evaluation criterion. Then, the corresponding findings were played side by side and evaluated by fourteen ultrasound experts using a point scale (5 points = very good; 1 point = insufficient).

RESULTS

The HHUS devices achieved relatively good results in terms of both the B-scan quality assessment and the ability to answer the clinical question, regardless of the manufacturer. One of the tested HHUS devices even achieved a significantly (p < 0.05) higher average points score in both the evaluation of B-scan quality and in the evaluation of clinical significance than the other devices. Regardless of the manufacturer, the HHUS devices performed best when determining the status/inferior vena cava volume and in the representation of ascites/free fluid.

CONCLUSION

In various clinical abdominal sonography questions, HHUS systems can reliably reproduce findings, and are-while bearing their limitations in mind-an acceptable alternative to conventional HEUS systems. Irrespective of this, the present study demonstrated relevant differences in the B-scan quality of HHUS devices from different manufacturers.

Echoscopy in scanning abdominal diseases in a critical care setting

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Targeted ultrasound examinations with portable ultrasound device (handheld ultrasound system [HHUS]) have been defined as "echoscopy" by the European Federation of Societies of Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (EFSUMB). For abdominal diseases it has been shown that echoscopy is sensitive and specific. The aim of this study is to show that the use of HHUS for abdominal ultrasonography is possible under the conditions prevailing in emergency and intensive care medicine and that it is not inferior to high-end devices (high-end ultrasound systems [HEUS]).

METHODS

Examinations were carried out with a first-generation Vscan™ (GE Medical Systems, Solingen, Germany) and HEUS device (Siemens Acuson X‑300 or X‑700, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany). The HEUS device was seen as standard. The examinations were randomized and blinded and carried out by two examiners within 30 min in order to avoid falsifications due to time delay. They took place in the intensive care unit, the emergency room and the emergency medical service. The results had to be recorded in an examination sheet.

RESULTS

In all, 86 patients (54 men and 32 women, aged 73 ± 14.58 [28-95] years) were included. In 45.35% (39/86) of the ultrasound examinations using HEUS and in 41.86% (36/89) of the cases using HHUS the examination conditions were optimal. Furthermore, 76.19% of the examinations were carried out by both examiners in the same scanning position. For the detection of liver tumours, HHUS shows a sensitivity of 70% and specificity of 100%. With regard to identifying signs of cholecystitis, i.e., evidence of surrounding inflammation (a) or hydrops (b), HHUS shows a sensitivity of 66.67% (a) and 60% (b) and a specificity of 97.06% (a) and 96.86% (b). The diagnosis of an ileus is successful with a sensitivity of 87.5% and a specificity of 60%. The respiratory variability of the inferior vena cava has a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 40% using HHUS. Ascites and pleural effusions can be diagnosed with a sensitivity of 89% and a specificity of 93.1%. When using the FAST (Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma) protocol, HHUS has a sensitivity of 80% and a specificity of 90.9%. With the exception of kidney cysts and inferior vena cava, the measurement of the diameter has a positive correlation.

CONCLUSION

Echoscopy of the abdomen in emergency and intensive care medicine is possible despite restrictive circumstances. The inferior vena cava can only be assessed to a limited extent with the first generation of Vscan™. In order to use sonography in emergency and intensive care medicine, a standardized procedure is to be aimed for and training in emergency sonography is necessary.

Miniaturised ultrasound evaluation at the bedside

PURPOSE

"Point-of-Care Ultrasound" (POCUS) is now a familiar term. Although the European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (ESFUMB) published a position paper about its usage (Nielsen et al. in Ultraschall Med 40(1):30-39. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-0783-2303 , 2019), there has not been much scientific focus on its utility in uro-nephrological clinical practice thus far. The aim of this study was to evaluate the present usage of pocket ultrasound devices at the bedside.

METHODS

27 investigators (all medical doctors with at least 6 months of experience in sonography) performed 280 bedside examinations using a pocket ultrasound device for common clinical issues.

RESULTS

The most frequent indications included evaluation of hydronephrosis (147), volume management including assessment of dimension of the vena cava inferior (IVC) (195), detection of pleural, pericardial and abdominal effusions (113) as well as residual urine (52). In 90%, specific clinical questions were effectively answered by the pocket ultrasound device alone.

CONCLUSIONS

POCUS can be useful in the uro-nephrological field. In the hands of an experienced investigator, it saves time and, when it is realised that departmental ultrasound is not cheap, there is also an economic benefit with applicability within both inpatient and outpatient clinic settings. While acknowledging its technical limits, pocket ultrasound devices may nevertheless be helpful in targeted situations for triage or for bedside follow-up exams after earlier high-end ultrasound-based diagnosis.

The Use of Handheld Ultrasound Devices in Emergency Medicine

Purpose of Review

Ultraportable handheld ultrasound (HHU) devices are being rapidly adopted by emergency medicine (EM) physicians. Though knowledge of the breadth of their utility and functionality is still limited compared to cart-based systems, these machines are becoming more common due to ease-of-use, extreme affordability, and improving technology.

Recent Findings

Images obtained with HHU are comparable to those obtained with traditional machines but create unique issues regarding billing and data management. HHU devices are increasingly used successfully to augment the education of practitioners-in-training, by emergency physicians in austere environments, and in the burgeoning fields of "tele-ultrasound" and augmented reality scanning.

Summary

This review seeks to describe the current state of use of HHU devices in the emergency department (ED) including device overview, institutional concerns, unique areas of use, recent literature since their adoption into clinical EM, and their future potential.

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.