Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology 7/2015

01.10.2015

Comparison of a pocket-size ultrasound device with a premium ultrasound machine: diagnostic value and time required in bedside ultrasound examination

verfasst von: Konrad Friedrich Stock, Bettina Klein, Dominik Steubl, Christian Lersch, Uwe Heemann, Stefan Wagenpfeil, Florian Eyer, Dir-Andre Clevert

Erschienen in: Abdominal Radiology | Ausgabe 7/2015

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

Time savings and clinical accuracy of a new miniature ultrasound device was investigated utilizing comparison with conventional high-end ultrasound instruments. Our objective was to determine appropriate usage and limitations of this diagnostic tool in internal medicine.

Methods

We investigated 28 patients from the internal-medicine department. Patients were examined with the Acuson P10 portable device and a Sonoline Antares instrument in a cross-over design. All investigations were carried out at the bedside; the results were entered on a standardized report form. The time for the ultrasound examination (transfer time, setting up and disassembly, switching on and off, and complete investigation time) was recorded separately.

Results

Mean time for overall examination per patient with the portable ultrasound device was shorter (25.0 ± 4.5 min) than with the high-end machine (29.4 ± 4.4 min; p < 0.001). When measuring the size of liver, spleen, and kidneys, the values obtained differed significantly between portable device and the high-end instrument. In our study, we identified 113 pathological ultrasound findings with the high-end ultrasound machine, while 82 pathological findings (73%) were concordantly detected with the portable ultrasound device. The main diagnostic strengths of the portable device were in the detection of ascites (sensitivity 80%), diagnosis of fatty liver, and identification of severe parenchymal liver damage.

Conclusions

The clinical utility of portable ultrasound machines is limited. There will be clinical roles for distinct clinical questions such as detection of ascites or pleural effusion when used by experienced examiners. However, sensitivity in detecting multiple pathologies is not comparable to high-end ultrasound machines.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Fischer T, Filimonow S, Petersein J, et al. (2002) Ultrasound at the bedside: does a portable ultrasound device save time? Ultraschall Med 23(5):311–314CrossRefPubMed Fischer T, Filimonow S, Petersein J, et al. (2002) Ultrasound at the bedside: does a portable ultrasound device save time? Ultraschall Med 23(5):311–314CrossRefPubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Vourvouri EC, Poldermans D, Schinkel AFL, et al. (2001) Abdominal aortic aneurysm screening using a hand-held ultrasound device. “A pilot study”. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 22(4):352–354CrossRefPubMed Vourvouri EC, Poldermans D, Schinkel AFL, et al. (2001) Abdominal aortic aneurysm screening using a hand-held ultrasound device. “A pilot study”. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 22(4):352–354CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Ryan SM, Smith E, Sidhu PS (2002) Comparison of the SonoSite and Acuson 128/XP10 ultrasound machines in the ‘bed-side’ assessment of the post liver transplant patient. Eur J Ultrasound 15(1–2):37–43CrossRefPubMed Ryan SM, Smith E, Sidhu PS (2002) Comparison of the SonoSite and Acuson 128/XP10 ultrasound machines in the ‘bed-side’ assessment of the post liver transplant patient. Eur J Ultrasound 15(1–2):37–43CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Oschatz E, Prosch H, Schober E, Mostbeck G (2004) Evaluation of a portable ultrasound device immediately after spiral computed tomography. Ultraschall Med 25(6):433–437CrossRefPubMed Oschatz E, Prosch H, Schober E, Mostbeck G (2004) Evaluation of a portable ultrasound device immediately after spiral computed tomography. Ultraschall Med 25(6):433–437CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Seitz K, Vasilakis D, Ziegler M (2003) Efficiency of a portable B-scan ultrasound device in comparison to a high-end machine in abdominal ultrasound. Results of a pilot study. Ultraschall Med 24(2):96–100CrossRefPubMed Seitz K, Vasilakis D, Ziegler M (2003) Efficiency of a portable B-scan ultrasound device in comparison to a high-end machine in abdominal ultrasound. Results of a pilot study. Ultraschall Med 24(2):96–100CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Ziegler CM, Seitz K, Leicht-Biener U, Mauch M (2004) Detection of therapeutically relevant diagnoses made by sonography of the upper abdomen: portable versus high-end sonographic units—a prospective study. Ultraschall Med 25(6):428–432CrossRefPubMed Ziegler CM, Seitz K, Leicht-Biener U, Mauch M (2004) Detection of therapeutically relevant diagnoses made by sonography of the upper abdomen: portable versus high-end sonographic units—a prospective study. Ultraschall Med 25(6):428–432CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Pieckenpack A, Klebl F, Dorenbeck U, et al. (2002) Evaluation of a new, portable ultrasound system in routine clinical use. Rofo 174(3):349–352CrossRefPubMed Pieckenpack A, Klebl F, Dorenbeck U, et al. (2002) Evaluation of a new, portable ultrasound system in routine clinical use. Rofo 174(3):349–352CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Beaulieu Y (2007) Bedside echocardiography in the assessment of the critically ill. Crit Care Med 35(5 Suppl):S235–S249CrossRefPubMed Beaulieu Y (2007) Bedside echocardiography in the assessment of the critically ill. Crit Care Med 35(5 Suppl):S235–S249CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Beaulieu Y, Marik PE (2005) Bedside ultrasonography in the ICU: part 2. Chest 128(3):1766–1781CrossRefPubMed Beaulieu Y, Marik PE (2005) Bedside ultrasonography in the ICU: part 2. Chest 128(3):1766–1781CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Price DD, Wilson SR, Murphy TG (2000) Trauma ultrasound feasibility during helicopter transport. Air Med J 19(4):144–146CrossRefPubMed Price DD, Wilson SR, Murphy TG (2000) Trauma ultrasound feasibility during helicopter transport. Air Med J 19(4):144–146CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Busch M (2006) Portable ultrasound in pre-hospital emergencies: a feasibility study. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 50(6):754–758CrossRefPubMed Busch M (2006) Portable ultrasound in pre-hospital emergencies: a feasibility study. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 50(6):754–758CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Lapostolle F, Petrovic T, Lenoir G, et al. (2006) Usefulness of hand-held ultrasound devices in out-of-hospital diagnosis performed by emergency physicians. Am J Emerg Med 24(2):237–242CrossRefPubMed Lapostolle F, Petrovic T, Lenoir G, et al. (2006) Usefulness of hand-held ultrasound devices in out-of-hospital diagnosis performed by emergency physicians. Am J Emerg Med 24(2):237–242CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Judmaier G, Seitz K (2004) How reliable is sonography of the upper abdomen with portable sonographic units? What does the future hold? Ultraschall Med 25(6):408–410CrossRefPubMed Judmaier G, Seitz K (2004) How reliable is sonography of the upper abdomen with portable sonographic units? What does the future hold? Ultraschall Med 25(6):408–410CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Comparison of a pocket-size ultrasound device with a premium ultrasound machine: diagnostic value and time required in bedside ultrasound examination
verfasst von
Konrad Friedrich Stock
Bettina Klein
Dominik Steubl
Christian Lersch
Uwe Heemann
Stefan Wagenpfeil
Florian Eyer
Dir-Andre Clevert
Publikationsdatum
01.10.2015
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Abdominal Radiology / Ausgabe 7/2015
Print ISSN: 2366-004X
Elektronische ISSN: 2366-0058
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-015-0406-z

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2015

Abdominal Radiology 7/2015 Zur Ausgabe

Update Radiologie

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