Performance of handheld ultrasound devices in diagnosis of pulmonary hypertension and right heart dysfunction in ICU patients

Dayioglu M., GÜRSEL G., Ozercan S., Aydin E. M., Nadastepe O.

ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY-A JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR ULTRASOUND AND ALLIED TECHNIQUES, cilt.41, sa.1, 2024 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 41 Sayı: 1
  • Basım Tarihi: 2024
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1111/echo.15721
  • Dergi Adı: ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY-A JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR ULTRASOUND AND ALLIED TECHNIQUES
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, Biotechnology Research Abstracts, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: handheld ultrasound devices, intensive care, pulmonary hypertension, right heart failure
  • Gazi Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

AimThe use of handheld ultrasonography devices (HHUD) has increased recently but there are limited data about their performance in the evaluation of right heart dysfunction (RHD) and pulmonary hypertension (PHT). The aim of the study is to compare the performance of a HHUD with a conventional ultrasound device (CUD) in assessing PHT and RHD.MethodsThis single-center prospective study was performed in a seven-bed teaching hospital intensive care unit (ICU). PHT and RHD criteria were compared by HHUD and CUD. Additional PHT criteria and right ventricle (RV) systolic and diastolic dysfunction criteria were also measured.ResultsForty-six patients were included in the study. There was no significant difference between the imaging rates and mean values of the parameters measured by both devices. When the positivity rates for additional PHT parameters and RHD criteria were compared, there were no significant differences between the devices. In Bland-Altman's analysis, there was good agreement and there was no bias between the measurements of the two devices but left ventricular end-systolic eccentricity index (LVSEI), right atrium area (RAA), and pulmonary artery diameter (PAD). Ninety percent of the patients had PHT probability, of whom 43% had a low, 37% had intermediate and 10% had a high probability of PHT. Ninety-two percent of the patients had RHD and there was no significant difference between the devices in the diagnosis of RHD (p = .212). When RV systolic and diastolic dysfunction evaluations of the devices were compared according to the British Society of Echocardiography (BSE) criteria there was no significant difference between the devices' measurements in the evaluation of systolic and diastolic function.ConclusionThe imaging and measurement capabilities of the HHUDs for PHT and RHD parameters were similar to CUDs, and considering the inconsistent parameters, the HHUD can be useful in diagnosing these problems.