nach oben

Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie

Erschienen in:

09.08.2022 | Reports of Original Investigations

A novel ultrasound software system for lumbar level identification in obstetric patients

verfasst von: Jorden Hetherington, MASc, Janette Brohan, MB, BCh, FCAI, Robert Rohling, PhD, Vit Gunka, MD, FRCPC, Purang Abolmaesumi, PhD, Arianne Albert, PhD, Anthony Chau, MD, FRCPC, MMSc

Erschienen in: Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie | Ausgabe 10/2022

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

Using machine learning, we developed a proprietary ultrasound software called the Spine Level Identification (SLIDE) system, which automatically identifies lumbar landmarks in real time as the operator slides the transducer over the lumber spine. Here, we assessed the agreement between SLIDE and manual palpation and traditional lumbar ultrasound (LUS) for determining the primary target L3–4 interspace.

Methods

Upon institutional ethics approval and informed consent, 76 healthy term parturients scheduled for elective Caesarean delivery were recruited. The L3–4 interspace was identified by manual palpation and then by the SLIDE method. The reference standard was located using traditional LUS by an experienced operator. The primary outcome was the L3–4 interspace identification agreement of manual palpation and SLIDE with the reference standard, as percentage agreement and Gwet’s agreement coefficient (AC1).

Results

The raw agreement was 70% with Gwet’s agreement coefficient (AC1) = 0.59 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41 to 0.77) for manual palpation and 84% with Gwet’s AC1 = 0.82 (95% CI, 0.70 to 0.93) for SLIDE. When the levels differ from the reference, the manual palpation method identified L2–3 more often than L4–5 while the SLIDE method identified equally above or below L3–4. The SLIDE system had greater agreement than palpation in locating L3–4 and all other lumber interspaces after controlling for body mass index (adjusted odds ratio, 2.99; 95% CI, 1.21 to 8.7; P = 0.02).

Conclusion

The SLIDE system had higher agreement with traditional ultrasound than manual palpation did in identifying L3–4 and all other lumber interspaces after adjusting for BMI in healthy term obstetric patients. Future studies should examine factors that affect agreement and ways to improve SLIDE for clinical integration.

Study Registration

www.ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02982317); registered 5 December 2016.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Margarido CB, Mikhael R, Arzola C, Balki M, Carvalho JC. The intercristal line determined by palpation is not a reliable anatomical landmark for neuraxial anesthesia. Can J Anesth 2011; 58: 262–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-010-9432-zCrossRefPubMed

Young B, Onwochei D, Desai N. Conventional landmark palpation vs. preprocedural ultrasound for neuraxial analgesia and anaesthesia in obstetrics - a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analyses. Anaesthesia 2021; 76: 818–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/anae.15255

Weiniger CF, Sharoni L. The use of ultrasound in obstetric anesthesia. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 2017; 30: 306–12. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACO.0000000000000450CrossRefPubMed

Arzola C. Preprocedure ultrasonography before initiating a neuraxial anesthetic procedure. Anesth Analg 2017; 124: 712–3. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000001627CrossRefPubMed

Tawfik MM, Atallah MM, Elkharboutly WS, Allakkany NS, Abdelkhalek M. Does preprocedural ultrasound increase the first-pass success rate of epidural catheterization before cesarean delivery? A randomized controlled trial. Anesth Analg 2017; 124: 851–6. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000001325CrossRefPubMed

Ecimovic P, Loughrey JP. Ultrasound in obstetric anesthesia: a review of current applications. Int J Obstet Anesth 2010; 19: 320–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijoa.2010.03.006CrossRefPubMed

Shaylor R, Halpern SH, Carvalho JC, Weiniger CF. An observational study of skill retention and practice adoption after a workshop on ultrasound-guided neuraxial anaesthesia. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2018; 35: 801–3. https://doi.org/10.1097/EJA.0000000000000840CrossRefPubMed

Hetherington J, Lessoway V, Gunka V, Abolmaesumi P, Rohling R. SLIDE: automatic spine level identification system using a deep convolutional neural network. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2017; 12: 1189–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-017-1575-8CrossRefPubMed

Beigi P, Malenfant P, Rasoulian A, Rohling R, Dube A, Gunka V. Three-dimensional ultrasound-guided real-time midline epidural needle placement with Epiguide: a prospective feasibility study. Ultrasound Med Biol 2017; 43: 375–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2016.08.033CrossRefPubMed

10.

Lee AJ, Ranasinghe JS, Chehade JM, et al. Ultrasound assessment of the vertebral level of the intercristal line in pregnancy. Anesth Analg 2011; 113: 559–64. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0b013e318222abe4CrossRefPubMed

11.

Gwet KL. Computing inter‐rater reliability and its variance in the presence of high agreement. Br J Math Stat Psychol 2008; 61: 29–48. https://doi.org/10.1348/000711006X126600CrossRefPubMed

12.

Team RC. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Available from URL: https://scholar.google.ca/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=yvS1QUEAAAAJ&citation_for_view=yvS1QUEAAAAJ:t6usbXjVLHcC (accessed April 2022).

13.

Hayes J, Borges B, Armstrong D, Srinivasan I. Accuracy of manual palpation vs ultrasound for identifying the L3–L4 intervertebral space level in children. Paediatr Anaesth 2014; 24: 510–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/pan.12355CrossRefPubMed

14.

Yu S, Tan KK, Sng BL, Li S, Sia AT. Real-time automatic spinal level identification with ultrasound image processing. 2015 IEEE 12th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI) 2015; 243–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISBI.2015.7163859

15.

Tiouririne M, Dixon AJ, Mauldin FW Jr, Scalzo D, Krishnaraj A. Imaging performance of a handheld ultrasound system with real-time computer-aided detection of lumbar spine anatomy: a feasibility study. Invest Radiol. 2017; 52: 447–55. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000361CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Chen EC, Mousavi P, Gill S, Fichtinger G, Abolmaesumi P. Ultrasound guided spine needle insertion. Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) 2010. https://doi.org/10.14288/1.0107556

17.

Rasoulian A, Osborn J, Sojoudi S, et al. A system for ultrasound-guided spinal injections: a feasibility study. International Conference on Information Processing in Computer-Assisted Interventions 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07521-1_10

18.

Ungi T, Lasso A, Fichtinger G. Tracked ultrasound in navigated spine interventions. Spinal Imaging and Image Analysis 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12508-4_15

19.

Krizhevsky A, Sutskever I, Hinton GE. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 2012. https://doi.org/10.1145/3065386CrossRef

20.

Leng Y, Yu S, Tan KK, Tildsley P, Sia AT, Sng BL. Development of a real-time lumbar ultrasound image processing system for epidural needle entry site localization. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2016; 4093–96. https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC.2016.7591626.

21.

Hetherington J, Pesteie M, Lessoway VA, Abolmaesumi P, Rohling RN. Identification and tracking of vertebrae in ultrasound using deep networks with unsupervised feature learning. Medical Imaging 2017: Image-Guided Procedures, Robotic Interventions, and Modeling 2017. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2252641CrossRef

22.

Broadbent CR, Maxwell WB, Ferrie R, Wilson DJ, Gawne‐Cain M, Russell R. Ability of anaesthetists to identify a marked lumbar interspace. Anaesthesia 2000; 55: 1122–6. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2044.2000.01547-4.x.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Hosokawa Y, Okutomi T, Hyuga S, Kato R, Kuczkowski KM. The concordance rate of L3/4 intervertebral lumbar level estimated by palpation and ultrasonography in Japanese parturients. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2020; 33: 2354–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2018.1550063CrossRefPubMed

24.

Hanhivaara J, Määttä JH, Niinimäki J, Nevalainen MT. Lumbosacral transitional vertebrae are associated with lumbar degeneration: retrospective evaluation of 3855 consecutive abdominal CT scans. Eur Radiol 2020; 30: 3409–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06691-2CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Furness G, Reilly MP, Kuchi S. An evaluation of ultrasound imaging for identification of lumbar intervertebral level. Anaesthesia 2002; 57: 277–80. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2044.2002.2403_4.xCrossRefPubMed

26.

Clevert DA, Schwarze V, Nyhsen C, D’Onofrio M, Sidhu P, Brady AP. ESR statement on portable ultrasound devices. Insights Imaging 2019; 10: 89. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-019-0775-x.CrossRef

27.

Hetherington JH. Automated lumbar vertebral level identification using ultrasound. Available from URL: https://open.library.ubc.ca/soa/cIRcle/collections/ubctheses/24/items/1.0355299 (accessed April 2022).

28.

Fedorov A, Beichel R, Kalpathy-Cramer J, et al. 3D Slicer as an image computing platform for the Quantitative Imaging Network. Magn Reson Imaging 2012; 30: 1323–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2012.05.001CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Titel: A novel ultrasound software system for lumbar level identification in obstetric patients
verfasst von: Jorden Hetherington, MASc
Janette Brohan, MB, BCh, FCAI
Robert Rohling, PhD
Vit Gunka, MD, FRCPC
Purang Abolmaesumi, PhD
Arianne Albert, PhD
Anthony Chau, MD, FRCPC, MMSc
Publikationsdatum: 09.08.2022
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in: Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie / Ausgabe 10/2022
Print ISSN: 0832-610X
Elektronische ISSN: 1496-8975
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-022-02300-6

Update AINS

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

hier abonnieren

Springer Medizin

A novel ultrasound software system for lumbar level identification in obstetric patients