Evaluation of commercially available point-of-care ultrasound for automated optic nerve sheath measurement.

IF 3.4 Q2 Medicine Ultrasound Journal Pub Date : 2023-08-02 DOI:10.1186/s13089-023-00331-8
Brad T Moore, Tom Osika, Steven Satterly, Shreyansh Shah, Tim Thirion, Spencer Hampton, Stephen Aylward, Sean Montgomery
{"title":"Evaluation of commercially available point-of-care ultrasound for automated optic nerve sheath measurement.","authors":"Brad T Moore,&nbsp;Tom Osika,&nbsp;Steven Satterly,&nbsp;Shreyansh Shah,&nbsp;Tim Thirion,&nbsp;Spencer Hampton,&nbsp;Stephen Aylward,&nbsp;Sean Montgomery","doi":"10.1186/s13089-023-00331-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Measurement of the optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD) via ultrasonography has been proposed as a non-invasive metric of intracranial pressure that may be employed during in-field patient triage. However, first responders are not typically trained to conduct sonographic exams and/or do not have access to an expensive ultrasound device. Therefore, for successful deployment of ONSD measurement in-field, we believe that first responders must have access to low-cost, portable ultrasound and be assisted by artificial intelligence (AI) systems that can automatically interpret the optic nerve sheath ultrasound scan. We examine the suitability of five commercially available, low-cost, portable ultrasound devices that can be combined with future artificial intelligence algorithms to reduce the training required for and cost of in-field optic nerve sheath diameter measurement. This paper is focused on the quality of the images generated by these low-cost probes. We report results of a clinician preference survey and compare with a lab analysis of three quantitative image quality metrics across devices. We also examine the suitability of the devices in a hypothetical far-forward deployment using operators unskilled in ultrasound, with the assumption of a future onboard AI video interpreter.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We find statistically significant differences in clinician ranking of the devices in the following categories: \"Image Quality\", \"Ease of Acquisition\", \"Software\", and \"Overall ONSD\". We show differences in signal-to-noise ratio, generalized contrast-to-noise ratio, point-spread function across the devices. These differences in image quality result in a statistically significant difference in manual ONSD measurement. Finally, we show that sufficiently wide transducers can capture the optic nerve sheath during blind (no visible B-mode) scans performed by operators unskilled in sonography.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Ultrasound of the optic nerve sheath has the potential to be a convenient, non-invasive, point-of-injury or triage measure for elevated intracranial pressure in cases of traumatic brain injury. When transducer width is sufficient, briefly trained operators may obtain video sequences of the optic nerve sheath without guidance. This data suggest that unskilled operators are able to achieve the images needed for AI interpretation. However, we also show that image quality differences between ultrasound probes may influence manual ONSD measurements.</p>","PeriodicalId":36911,"journal":{"name":"Ultrasound Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10397168/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ultrasound Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13089-023-00331-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Measurement of the optic nerve sheath diameter (ONSD) via ultrasonography has been proposed as a non-invasive metric of intracranial pressure that may be employed during in-field patient triage. However, first responders are not typically trained to conduct sonographic exams and/or do not have access to an expensive ultrasound device. Therefore, for successful deployment of ONSD measurement in-field, we believe that first responders must have access to low-cost, portable ultrasound and be assisted by artificial intelligence (AI) systems that can automatically interpret the optic nerve sheath ultrasound scan. We examine the suitability of five commercially available, low-cost, portable ultrasound devices that can be combined with future artificial intelligence algorithms to reduce the training required for and cost of in-field optic nerve sheath diameter measurement. This paper is focused on the quality of the images generated by these low-cost probes. We report results of a clinician preference survey and compare with a lab analysis of three quantitative image quality metrics across devices. We also examine the suitability of the devices in a hypothetical far-forward deployment using operators unskilled in ultrasound, with the assumption of a future onboard AI video interpreter.

Results: We find statistically significant differences in clinician ranking of the devices in the following categories: "Image Quality", "Ease of Acquisition", "Software", and "Overall ONSD". We show differences in signal-to-noise ratio, generalized contrast-to-noise ratio, point-spread function across the devices. These differences in image quality result in a statistically significant difference in manual ONSD measurement. Finally, we show that sufficiently wide transducers can capture the optic nerve sheath during blind (no visible B-mode) scans performed by operators unskilled in sonography.

Conclusions: Ultrasound of the optic nerve sheath has the potential to be a convenient, non-invasive, point-of-injury or triage measure for elevated intracranial pressure in cases of traumatic brain injury. When transducer width is sufficient, briefly trained operators may obtain video sequences of the optic nerve sheath without guidance. This data suggest that unskilled operators are able to achieve the images needed for AI interpretation. However, we also show that image quality differences between ultrasound probes may influence manual ONSD measurements.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
评价市售点护理超声自动测量视神经鞘。
背景:通过超声测量视神经鞘直径(ONSD)已被提出作为一种非侵入性的颅内压指标,可用于现场患者分诊。然而,急救人员通常没有接受过超声检查的培训,而且/或者没有机会使用昂贵的超声设备。因此,为了在现场成功部署ONSD测量,我们认为第一响应者必须能够获得低成本的便携式超声,并在人工智能(AI)系统的协助下,自动解读视神经鞘超声扫描。我们研究了五种市售的低成本便携式超声设备的适用性,这些设备可以与未来的人工智能算法相结合,以减少现场视神经鞘直径测量所需的培训和成本。本文的重点是这些低成本探测器产生的图像质量。我们报告了临床医生偏好调查的结果,并与跨设备的三个定量图像质量指标的实验室分析进行了比较。我们还研究了这些设备在假设的远前部署中的适用性,使用不熟练的超声操作员,并假设未来有机载人工智能视频解释器。结果:我们发现临床医生在以下类别中对设备的排名有统计学意义:“图像质量”、“易于获取”、“软件”和“总体ONSD”。我们展示了不同器件间信噪比、广义对比噪声比、点扩散函数的差异。这些图像质量的差异导致手动ONSD测量的统计显著差异。最后,我们表明,足够宽的换能器可以捕捉视神经鞘在盲(不可见的b模式)扫描由操作员不熟练的超声检查。结论:视神经鞘超声有可能成为创伤性脑损伤患者颅内压升高的一种方便、无创、损伤点或分诊措施。当换能器宽度足够时,经过简单训练的操作人员可以在没有指导的情况下获得视神经鞘的视频序列。这些数据表明,不熟练的操作员也能够获得人工智能解释所需的图像。然而,我们也表明超声探头之间的图像质量差异可能会影响人工ONSD测量。
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 Journal
Ultrasound Journal Health Professions-Radiological and Ultrasound Technology
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
2.90%
发文量
45
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊最新文献
Sonographic findings using the SAFE-A protocol in pre- and post-hemodialysis patients. Utilizing a balloon sheath and miniprobe for diagnostic endoscopic ultrasound in eosinophilic esophagitis: a case series. Transorbital B-mode ultrasound for the assessment of posterior globe flattening in idiopathic intracranial hypertension: a pilot study. Interobserver agreement of an ED PoCUS video training dataset of normal appendix and appendicitis in children. Deep venous thrombosis (DVT) diagnostics: gleaning insights from point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) techniques in emergencies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
×
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