Suppr超能文献

手持式和台式超声设备用于神经轴深度和标志评估的比较准确性。

The comparative accuracy of a handheld and console ultrasound device for neuraxial depth and landmark assessment.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative, and Pain Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, USA.

Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, USA.

出版信息

Int J Obstet Anesth. 2019 Aug;39:68-73. doi: 10.1016/j.ijoa.2019.01.004. Epub 2019 Jan 11.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The study aimed to compare the accuracy of epidural depth estimation of a handheld ultrasound device, with an integrated algorithm that estimates epidural depth (AU; Accuro, Rivanna Medical), to that of a console ultrasound machine (GU; GE LOGIC S8).

METHODS

Women requesting labor epidural analgesia consented to this prospective cohort study. The L2/3, L3/4, and L4/5 interspaces and the respective depths to the epidural space were identified, marked and measured using an AU and GU. An anesthesia provider who was blinded to ultrasound depth measurements performed epidural analgesia at one of the ultrasound identified insertion points and recorded the Tuohy needle depth at loss-of-resistance. Bland Altman analysis was used to measure the agreement between the epidural depths measured by the AU and GU.

RESULTS

A total of 47 women were analyzed. The mean ± standard deviation body mass index of the study cohort was 29 ± 5 kg/m [range 23-45]. The mean difference between the epidural depths measured by the AU and GU was -0.29 cm [95% limit of agreement 0.50 to -0.91]. The mean difference between the depth to the epidural space measured by the GU versus the needle depth was -0.33 cm [95% CI -0.49 to -0.16]. The previously reported AU versus needle depth was -0.61 cm [95% CI -0.79 to -0.44].

CONCLUSION

The AU and GU provided comparable epidural depth estimates. The AU device may be a reasonable alternative to more sophisticated ultrasound devices in determining the epidural space and depth in a non-obese obstetric population.

摘要

背景

本研究旨在比较手持超声设备(AU;Accuro,Rivanna Medical)中内置的估计硬膜外深度的算法与控制台超声机(GU;GE LOGIC S8)的硬膜外深度估计的准确性。

方法

要求行分娩硬膜外镇痛的女性同意参与这项前瞻性队列研究。使用 AU 和 GU 识别、标记和测量 L2/3、L3/4 和 L4/5 椎间以及相应的硬膜外空间深度。一位对超声深度测量结果不知情的麻醉医生在超声确定的一个插入点进行硬膜外镇痛,并记录 Tuohy 针的阻力丧失深度。Bland Altman 分析用于测量 AU 和 GU 测量的硬膜外深度之间的一致性。

结果

共分析了 47 名女性。研究队列的平均 BMI(标准差)为 29 ± 5 kg/m [范围 23-45]。AU 和 GU 测量的硬膜外深度之间的平均差值为-0.29 cm [95% 一致性限 0.50 至 -0.91]。GU 测量的硬膜外空间深度与针深度之间的平均差值为-0.33 cm [95% CI -0.49 至 -0.16]。之前报道的 AU 与针深度的差值为-0.61 cm [95% CI -0.79 至 -0.44]。

结论

AU 和 GU 提供了可比的硬膜外深度估计值。在确定非肥胖产科人群的硬膜外空间和深度时,AU 设备可能是更复杂的超声设备的合理替代方案。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验