Cargando…

Hand-Held Portable Versus Conventional Cart-Based Ultrasound in Musculoskeletal Imaging

BACKGROUND: Portable ultrasound machines are now common, used for point-of-care applications and needle guidance for percutaneous procedures; however, the effectiveness of portable ultrasound in evaluation of the musculoskeletal system has not been fully assessed. PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Falkowski, Anna L., Jacobson, Jon A., Freehill, Michael T., Kalia, Vivek
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7016312/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32110680
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967119901017
_version_ 1783496960450232320
author Falkowski, Anna L.
Jacobson, Jon A.
Freehill, Michael T.
Kalia, Vivek
author_facet Falkowski, Anna L.
Jacobson, Jon A.
Freehill, Michael T.
Kalia, Vivek
author_sort Falkowski, Anna L.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Portable ultrasound machines are now common, used for point-of-care applications and needle guidance for percutaneous procedures; however, the effectiveness of portable ultrasound in evaluation of the musculoskeletal system has not been fully assessed. PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate the use of portable hand-held ultrasound in comparison with conventional cart-based ultrasound in evaluation of the musculoskeletal system. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: In this institutional review board–approved, prospective study, 100 consecutive patients with informed consent were imaged through use of both portable and cart-based ultrasound equipment using 12-5 MHz linear transducers. Agreement in ultrasound diagnosis was documented along with expected clinical changes in management if there was disagreement (definitely no, probably no, uncertain, probably yes, definitely yes). Imaging details of disagreement cases were recorded, and descriptive statistics were calculated. RESULTS: There were 42 male and 58 female patients (mean ± SD age, 53 ± 13 years) imaged over a time period of 20 months. Anatomic areas scanned were the shoulder (n = 30), elbow (n = 11), hand and wrist (n = 15), hip (n = 10), knee (n = 11), foot and ankle (n = 12), and others (n = 11). Scanning with conventional ultrasound revealed abnormality in 92% of patients. Agreement in diagnosis made between portable versus cart-based ultrasound was found in 65% of patients. In the 35% of patients with discordant results, the change in diagnosis resulted in no change in clinical management in 46%, probably no change in 29%, uncertain change in 14%, probable change in 11%, and definite change in 0%. The diagnoses changing management (4%; 4/100) included nondetection of a satellite nodule (n = 1), ganglion cyst (n = 1), hernia (n = 1), and underestimated tendon tear (n = 1). CONCLUSION: When compared with conventional cart-based ultrasound, a musculoskeletal diagnosis using portable hand-held ultrasound was concordant or was discordant without clinical relevance in 96% (96/100) of patients. Knowledge of benefits and limitations of portable hand-held ultrasound will help determine areas where specific types of ultrasound equipment can be used.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7016312
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70163122020-02-27 Hand-Held Portable Versus Conventional Cart-Based Ultrasound in Musculoskeletal Imaging Falkowski, Anna L. Jacobson, Jon A. Freehill, Michael T. Kalia, Vivek Orthop J Sports Med Article BACKGROUND: Portable ultrasound machines are now common, used for point-of-care applications and needle guidance for percutaneous procedures; however, the effectiveness of portable ultrasound in evaluation of the musculoskeletal system has not been fully assessed. PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate the use of portable hand-held ultrasound in comparison with conventional cart-based ultrasound in evaluation of the musculoskeletal system. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: In this institutional review board–approved, prospective study, 100 consecutive patients with informed consent were imaged through use of both portable and cart-based ultrasound equipment using 12-5 MHz linear transducers. Agreement in ultrasound diagnosis was documented along with expected clinical changes in management if there was disagreement (definitely no, probably no, uncertain, probably yes, definitely yes). Imaging details of disagreement cases were recorded, and descriptive statistics were calculated. RESULTS: There were 42 male and 58 female patients (mean ± SD age, 53 ± 13 years) imaged over a time period of 20 months. Anatomic areas scanned were the shoulder (n = 30), elbow (n = 11), hand and wrist (n = 15), hip (n = 10), knee (n = 11), foot and ankle (n = 12), and others (n = 11). Scanning with conventional ultrasound revealed abnormality in 92% of patients. Agreement in diagnosis made between portable versus cart-based ultrasound was found in 65% of patients. In the 35% of patients with discordant results, the change in diagnosis resulted in no change in clinical management in 46%, probably no change in 29%, uncertain change in 14%, probable change in 11%, and definite change in 0%. The diagnoses changing management (4%; 4/100) included nondetection of a satellite nodule (n = 1), ganglion cyst (n = 1), hernia (n = 1), and underestimated tendon tear (n = 1). CONCLUSION: When compared with conventional cart-based ultrasound, a musculoskeletal diagnosis using portable hand-held ultrasound was concordant or was discordant without clinical relevance in 96% (96/100) of patients. Knowledge of benefits and limitations of portable hand-held ultrasound will help determine areas where specific types of ultrasound equipment can be used. SAGE Publications 2020-02-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7016312/ /pubmed/32110680 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967119901017 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Article
Falkowski, Anna L.
Jacobson, Jon A.
Freehill, Michael T.
Kalia, Vivek
Hand-Held Portable Versus Conventional Cart-Based Ultrasound in Musculoskeletal Imaging
title Hand-Held Portable Versus Conventional Cart-Based Ultrasound in Musculoskeletal Imaging
title_full Hand-Held Portable Versus Conventional Cart-Based Ultrasound in Musculoskeletal Imaging
title_fullStr Hand-Held Portable Versus Conventional Cart-Based Ultrasound in Musculoskeletal Imaging
title_full_unstemmed Hand-Held Portable Versus Conventional Cart-Based Ultrasound in Musculoskeletal Imaging
title_short Hand-Held Portable Versus Conventional Cart-Based Ultrasound in Musculoskeletal Imaging
title_sort hand-held portable versus conventional cart-based ultrasound in musculoskeletal imaging
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7016312/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32110680
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967119901017
work_keys_str_mv AT falkowskiannal handheldportableversusconventionalcartbasedultrasoundinmusculoskeletalimaging
AT jacobsonjona handheldportableversusconventionalcartbasedultrasoundinmusculoskeletalimaging
AT freehillmichaelt handheldportableversusconventionalcartbasedultrasoundinmusculoskeletalimaging
AT kaliavivek handheldportableversusconventionalcartbasedultrasoundinmusculoskeletalimaging