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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Leonhäuser, Dorothea, Castelar, Carlos, Schlebusch, Thomas, Rohm, Martin, Rupp, Rüdiger, Leonhardt, Steffen, Walter, Marian, Grosse, Joachim O.
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