Cargando…

Reproducibility of shear wave elastography among operators, machines, and probes in an elasticity phantom

PURPOSE: This study was aimed to investigate the reproducibility of shear wave elastography (SWE) among operators, machines, and probes in a phantom, and to evaluate the effect of depth of the embedded inclusions and the accuracy of the measurements. METHODS: In vitro stiffness measurements were mad...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Alrashed, Abdulaziz Ibrahim, Alfuraih, Abdulrahman M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Korean Society of Ultrasound in Medicine 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7758105/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32660213
http://dx.doi.org/10.14366/usg.20011
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: This study was aimed to investigate the reproducibility of shear wave elastography (SWE) among operators, machines, and probes in a phantom, and to evaluate the effect of depth of the embedded inclusions and the accuracy of the measurements. METHODS: In vitro stiffness measurements were made of six inclusions (10, 40, and 60 kPa) embedded at two depths (1.5 cm and 5 cm) in an elastography phantom. Measurements were obtained by two sonographers using two ultrasound machines (the SuperSonic Imagine Aixplorer with the XC6-1, SL10-2 and SL18-5 probes, and the General Electric LOGIQ E9 with the 9L-D probe). Variability was evaluated using the coefficient of variation. Reproducibility was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). RESULTS: For shallow inclusions, low variability was observed between operators (range, 0.9% to 5.4%). However, the variability increased significantly for deep inclusions (range, 2.4% to 80.8%). The measurement difference between the operators was 1%-15% for superficial inclusions and 3%-43% for deep inclusions. Inter-operator reproducibility was almost perfect (ICC>0.90). The measurement difference between machines was 0%-15% for superficial inclusions and 38.6%-82.9% for deep inclusions. For superficial inclusions, the reproducibility among the three probes was excellent (ICC>0.97). The mean stiffness values of the 10 kPa inclusion were overestimated by 16%, while those of the 40 kPa and 60 kPa inclusions were underestimated by 42% and 48%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Phantom SWE measurements were only reproducible among operators, machines, and probes at superficial depths. SWE measurements acquired in deep regions should not be used interchangeably among operators, machines, or probes.