Sie können Bookmarks mittels Listen verwalten, loggen Sie sich dafür bitte in Ihr SLUB Benutzerkonto ein.
Medientyp:
E-Artikel
Titel:
Detectable Bias between Vascular Ultrasound Echo-Tracking Systems: Relevance Depends on Application
Beteiligte:
Malik, Afrah E. F.;
Giudici, Alessandro;
van der Laan, Koen W. F.;
Op ’t Roodt, Jos;
Mess, Werner H.;
Delhaas, Tammo;
Spronck, Bart;
Reesink, Koen D.
Erschienen:
MDPI AG, 2022
Erschienen in:
Journal of Clinical Medicine, 12 (2022) 1, Seite 69
Sprache:
Englisch
DOI:
10.3390/jcm12010069
ISSN:
2077-0383
Entstehung:
Anmerkungen:
Beschreibung:
The Esaote MyLab70 ultrasound system has been extensively used to evaluate arterial properties. Since it is reaching end-of-service-life, ongoing studies are forced to seek an alternative, with some opting for the Esaote MyLabOne. Biases might exist between the two systems, which, if uncorrected, could potentially lead to the misinterpretation of results. This study aims to evaluate a potential bias between the two devices. Moreover, by comparing two identical MyLabOne systems, this study also aims to investigate whether biases estimated between the MyLabOne and MyLab70 employed in this study could be generalized to any other pair of similar scanners. Using a phantom set-up, we performed n = 60 measurements to compare MyLab70 to MyLabOne and n = 40 measurements to compare the two MyLabOne systems. Comparisons were performed to measure diameter, wall thickness, and distension. Both comparisons led to significant biases for the diameter (relative bias: −0.27% and −0.30% for the inter- and intra-scanner model, respectively, p < 0.05) and wall thickness (relative bias: 0.38% and −1.23% for inter- and intra-scanner model, respectively p < 0.05), but not for distension (relative bias: 0.48% and −0.12% for inter- and intra-scanner model, respectively, p > 0.05). The biases estimated here cannot be generalized to any other pair of similar scanners. Therefore, longitudinal studies with large sample sizes switching between scanners should perform a preliminary comparison to evaluate potential biases between their devices. Furthermore, caution is warranted when using biases reported in similar comparative studies. Further work should evaluate the presence and relevance of similar biases in human data.