Does matrix transducer technology improve quality and repeatability of four-dimensional tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion and mitral annular plane systolic excursion measurements?

IF 0.8 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Ultrasound Pub Date : 2024-01-09 DOI:10.1177/1742271x231215501
Samantha Thomas, Anna Erenbourg, Melissa Chang, A. G. D. M. T. Ferreira, Gordon Stevenson, Alec Welsh
{"title":"Does matrix transducer technology improve quality and repeatability of four-dimensional tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion and mitral annular plane systolic excursion measurements?","authors":"Samantha Thomas, Anna Erenbourg, Melissa Chang, A. G. D. M. T. Ferreira, Gordon Stevenson, Alec Welsh","doi":"10.1177/1742271x231215501","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Novel ultrasound technology and software processing allow offline evaluation of tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion and mitral annular plane systolic excursion measurements. We wished to compare both novel 4D matrix (eM6C) and conventional (RAB6-D) transducers with variable settings (electronic spatiotemporal image correlation, spatiotemporal image correlation and four-dimensional real time) to determine if there was a significant difference in absolute value, quality and repeatability of the resultant reconstructed image and M-mode trace. A blinded prospective cross-sectional study of normal fetuses from 23 to 38 weeks’ gestation were recruited. After routine sonography, four-dimensional volumes were stored and analysed using GE 4DView™ software. Statistical analysis explored variability, correlations and repeatability of the measurements with chi-square analysis, intraclass correlations and the Bland–Altman comparison plots. A scoring system was devised for image quality. Eighteen participants generated 282 data volumes. Absolute values demonstrated some inconsistencies for both tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion and mitral annular plane systolic excursion measurements with variations between transducers: the highest for the RAB6-D/spatiotemporal image correlation setting and the lowest for the four-dimensional real-time settings. The RAB6-D/spatiotemporal image correlation setting was the most repeatable combination (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.85). Poorest image quality (M-mode trace, four-chamber view, annuli) came from the RAB6-D/four-dimensional real-time combination with the eM6C/electronic spatiotemporal image correlation and RAB6-D/spatiotemporal image correlation settings being nearly identical. We show that transducer and setting combinations influence absolute tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion/mitral annular plane systolic excursion measurements, so need to be articulated in future research. The transducer setting (electronic spatiotemporal image correlation/spatiotemporal image correlation/four-dimensional real time) was a more significant factor than the type of transducer (conventional vs matrix). Subjective image evaluation does not correlate well with repeatability of image acquisition. Further studies are needed to compare measurements using four-dimensional post-processing tools against conventional real-time measurements.","PeriodicalId":23440,"journal":{"name":"Ultrasound","volume":"51 37","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ultrasound","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1742271x231215501","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Novel ultrasound technology and software processing allow offline evaluation of tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion and mitral annular plane systolic excursion measurements. We wished to compare both novel 4D matrix (eM6C) and conventional (RAB6-D) transducers with variable settings (electronic spatiotemporal image correlation, spatiotemporal image correlation and four-dimensional real time) to determine if there was a significant difference in absolute value, quality and repeatability of the resultant reconstructed image and M-mode trace. A blinded prospective cross-sectional study of normal fetuses from 23 to 38 weeks’ gestation were recruited. After routine sonography, four-dimensional volumes were stored and analysed using GE 4DView™ software. Statistical analysis explored variability, correlations and repeatability of the measurements with chi-square analysis, intraclass correlations and the Bland–Altman comparison plots. A scoring system was devised for image quality. Eighteen participants generated 282 data volumes. Absolute values demonstrated some inconsistencies for both tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion and mitral annular plane systolic excursion measurements with variations between transducers: the highest for the RAB6-D/spatiotemporal image correlation setting and the lowest for the four-dimensional real-time settings. The RAB6-D/spatiotemporal image correlation setting was the most repeatable combination (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.85). Poorest image quality (M-mode trace, four-chamber view, annuli) came from the RAB6-D/four-dimensional real-time combination with the eM6C/electronic spatiotemporal image correlation and RAB6-D/spatiotemporal image correlation settings being nearly identical. We show that transducer and setting combinations influence absolute tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion/mitral annular plane systolic excursion measurements, so need to be articulated in future research. The transducer setting (electronic spatiotemporal image correlation/spatiotemporal image correlation/four-dimensional real time) was a more significant factor than the type of transducer (conventional vs matrix). Subjective image evaluation does not correlate well with repeatability of image acquisition. Further studies are needed to compare measurements using four-dimensional post-processing tools against conventional real-time measurements.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
矩阵换能器技术能否提高四维三尖瓣瓣环平面收缩期偏移和二尖瓣瓣环平面收缩期偏移测量的质量和重复性?
通过新型超声技术和软件处理,可以离线评估三尖瓣瓣环平面收缩期偏移和二尖瓣瓣环平面收缩期偏移测量值。我们希望比较新型四维矩阵(eM6C)和传统(RAB6-D)换能器的不同设置(电子时空图像相关性、时空图像相关性和四维实时性),以确定重建图像和 M 型轨迹的绝对值、质量和可重复性是否存在显著差异。一项盲法前瞻性横断面研究招募了妊娠 23 至 38 周的正常胎儿。常规超声造影后,使用 GE 4DView™ 软件储存和分析四维容积。统计分析通过秩方分析、类内相关性和布兰-阿尔特曼对比图探讨了测量的变异性、相关性和重复性。还设计了一套图像质量评分系统。18 名参与者生成了 282 个数据量。三尖瓣瓣环面收缩期偏移和二尖瓣瓣环面收缩期偏移测量的绝对值显示出一些不一致性,不同传感器之间存在差异:RAB6-D/时相图像相关设置的绝对值最高,四维实时设置的绝对值最低。RAB6-D/spatiotemporal 图像相关设置是重复性最高的组合(类内相关系数 = 0.85)。RAB6-D/四维实时组合的图像质量最差(M 型轨迹、四腔切面、环形),而 eM6C/电子时空图像相关和 RAB6-D/ 时空图像相关设置几乎相同。我们发现,换能器和设置组合会影响三尖瓣环面收缩期绝对偏移/半月环面收缩期绝对偏移的测量,因此需要在今后的研究中加以阐明。换能器设置(电子时空图像相关/时空图像相关/四维实时)是比换能器类型(传统与矩阵)更重要的因素。主观图像评价与图像采集的可重复性没有很好的相关性。还需要进一步研究,将使用四维后处理工具进行的测量与传统的实时测量进行比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Ultrasound
Ultrasound RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
55
期刊介绍: Ultrasound is the official journal of the British Medical Ultrasound Society (BMUS), a multidisciplinary, charitable society comprising radiologists, obstetricians, sonographers, physicists and veterinarians amongst others.
期刊最新文献
Two case reports of triple ectopic: Literature review of incidence, risk factors and management of recurrent ectopic pregnancy. Beyond the hernia in groin ultrasound. Investigation of artificial intelligence-based clinical decision support system's performance in reducing the fine needle aspiration rate of thyroid nodules: A pilot study. Advanced multimodal ultrasound for pre-operative assessment of skin tumours: A case series. Diagnostic accuracy of strain cervical elastography as a predictor for preterm delivery: A single tertiary care centre study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1