Cargando…
Evaluation of electrical impedance tomography for determination of urinary bladder volume: comparison with standard ultrasound methods in healthy volunteers
BACKGROUND: Continuous non-invasive urinary bladder volume measurement (cystovolumetry) would allow better management of urinary tract disease. Electrical impedance tomography (EIT) represents a promising method to overcome the limitations of non-continuous ultrasound measurements. The aim of this s...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6045869/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30005629 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12938-018-0526-0 |
_version_ | 1783339741577478144 |
---|---|
author | Leonhäuser, Dorothea Castelar, Carlos Schlebusch, Thomas Rohm, Martin Rupp, Rüdiger Leonhardt, Steffen Walter, Marian Grosse, Joachim O. |
author_facet | Leonhäuser, Dorothea Castelar, Carlos Schlebusch, Thomas Rohm, Martin Rupp, Rüdiger Leonhardt, Steffen Walter, Marian Grosse, Joachim O. |
author_sort | Leonhäuser, Dorothea |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Continuous non-invasive urinary bladder volume measurement (cystovolumetry) would allow better management of urinary tract disease. Electrical impedance tomography (EIT) represents a promising method to overcome the limitations of non-continuous ultrasound measurements. The aim of this study was to compare the measurement accuracy of EIT to standard ultrasound in healthy volunteers. METHODS: For EIT of the bladder a commercial device (Goe MF II) was used with 4 different configurations of 16 standard ECG electrodes attached to the lower abdomen of healthy participants. To estimate maximum bladder capacity (BCmax) and residual urine (RU) two ultrasound methods (US-Ellipsoid and US-L × W × H) and a bedside bladder scanner (BS), were performed at the point of urgency and after voiding. For volume reference, BCmax and RU were validated by urine collection in a weight measuring pitcher. The global impedance method was used offline to estimate BCmax and RU from EIT. RESULTS: The mean error of US-Ellipsoid (37 ± 17%) and US-L × W × H (36 ± 15%) and EIT (32 ± 18%) showed no significant differences in the estimation of BCmax (mean 743 ± 200 ml) normalized to pitcher volumetry. BS showed significantly worse accuracy (55 ± 9%). Volumetry of RU (mean 152.1 ± 64 ml) revealed comparable higher errors for both EIT (72 ± 58%) and BS (63 ± 24%) compared to US-Ellipsoid (54 ± 25%). In case of RU, EIT accuracy is dependent on electrode configuration, as the Stripes (41 ± 25%) and Matrix (38 ± 27%) configurations revealed significantly superior accuracy to the 1 × 16 (116 ± 62%) configuration. CONCLUSIONS: EIT-cystovolumetry compares well with ultrasound techniques. For estimation of RU, the selection of the EIT electrode configuration is important. Also, the development of an algorithm should consider the impact of movement artefacts. Finally, the accuracy of non-invasive ultrasound accepted as gold standard of cystovolumetry should be reconsidered. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6045869 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-60458692018-07-16 Evaluation of electrical impedance tomography for determination of urinary bladder volume: comparison with standard ultrasound methods in healthy volunteers Leonhäuser, Dorothea Castelar, Carlos Schlebusch, Thomas Rohm, Martin Rupp, Rüdiger Leonhardt, Steffen Walter, Marian Grosse, Joachim O. Biomed Eng Online Research BACKGROUND: Continuous non-invasive urinary bladder volume measurement (cystovolumetry) would allow better management of urinary tract disease. Electrical impedance tomography (EIT) represents a promising method to overcome the limitations of non-continuous ultrasound measurements. The aim of this study was to compare the measurement accuracy of EIT to standard ultrasound in healthy volunteers. METHODS: For EIT of the bladder a commercial device (Goe MF II) was used with 4 different configurations of 16 standard ECG electrodes attached to the lower abdomen of healthy participants. To estimate maximum bladder capacity (BCmax) and residual urine (RU) two ultrasound methods (US-Ellipsoid and US-L × W × H) and a bedside bladder scanner (BS), were performed at the point of urgency and after voiding. For volume reference, BCmax and RU were validated by urine collection in a weight measuring pitcher. The global impedance method was used offline to estimate BCmax and RU from EIT. RESULTS: The mean error of US-Ellipsoid (37 ± 17%) and US-L × W × H (36 ± 15%) and EIT (32 ± 18%) showed no significant differences in the estimation of BCmax (mean 743 ± 200 ml) normalized to pitcher volumetry. BS showed significantly worse accuracy (55 ± 9%). Volumetry of RU (mean 152.1 ± 64 ml) revealed comparable higher errors for both EIT (72 ± 58%) and BS (63 ± 24%) compared to US-Ellipsoid (54 ± 25%). In case of RU, EIT accuracy is dependent on electrode configuration, as the Stripes (41 ± 25%) and Matrix (38 ± 27%) configurations revealed significantly superior accuracy to the 1 × 16 (116 ± 62%) configuration. CONCLUSIONS: EIT-cystovolumetry compares well with ultrasound techniques. For estimation of RU, the selection of the EIT electrode configuration is important. Also, the development of an algorithm should consider the impact of movement artefacts. Finally, the accuracy of non-invasive ultrasound accepted as gold standard of cystovolumetry should be reconsidered. BioMed Central 2018-07-13 /pmc/articles/PMC6045869/ /pubmed/30005629 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12938-018-0526-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Leonhäuser, Dorothea Castelar, Carlos Schlebusch, Thomas Rohm, Martin Rupp, Rüdiger Leonhardt, Steffen Walter, Marian Grosse, Joachim O. Evaluation of electrical impedance tomography for determination of urinary bladder volume: comparison with standard ultrasound methods in healthy volunteers |
title | Evaluation of electrical impedance tomography for determination of urinary bladder volume: comparison with standard ultrasound methods in healthy volunteers |
title_full | Evaluation of electrical impedance tomography for determination of urinary bladder volume: comparison with standard ultrasound methods in healthy volunteers |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of electrical impedance tomography for determination of urinary bladder volume: comparison with standard ultrasound methods in healthy volunteers |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of electrical impedance tomography for determination of urinary bladder volume: comparison with standard ultrasound methods in healthy volunteers |
title_short | Evaluation of electrical impedance tomography for determination of urinary bladder volume: comparison with standard ultrasound methods in healthy volunteers |
title_sort | evaluation of electrical impedance tomography for determination of urinary bladder volume: comparison with standard ultrasound methods in healthy volunteers |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6045869/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30005629 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12938-018-0526-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT leonhauserdorothea evaluationofelectricalimpedancetomographyfordeterminationofurinarybladdervolumecomparisonwithstandardultrasoundmethodsinhealthyvolunteers AT castelarcarlos evaluationofelectricalimpedancetomographyfordeterminationofurinarybladdervolumecomparisonwithstandardultrasoundmethodsinhealthyvolunteers AT schlebuschthomas evaluationofelectricalimpedancetomographyfordeterminationofurinarybladdervolumecomparisonwithstandardultrasoundmethodsinhealthyvolunteers AT rohmmartin evaluationofelectricalimpedancetomographyfordeterminationofurinarybladdervolumecomparisonwithstandardultrasoundmethodsinhealthyvolunteers AT rupprudiger evaluationofelectricalimpedancetomographyfordeterminationofurinarybladdervolumecomparisonwithstandardultrasoundmethodsinhealthyvolunteers AT leonhardtsteffen evaluationofelectricalimpedancetomographyfordeterminationofurinarybladdervolumecomparisonwithstandardultrasoundmethodsinhealthyvolunteers AT waltermarian evaluationofelectricalimpedancetomographyfordeterminationofurinarybladdervolumecomparisonwithstandardultrasoundmethodsinhealthyvolunteers AT grossejoachimo evaluationofelectricalimpedancetomographyfordeterminationofurinarybladdervolumecomparisonwithstandardultrasoundmethodsinhealthyvolunteers |