Park Kristen E, Mehta Preeya, Tran Charlene, Parikh Alomi O, Zhou Qifa, Zhang-Nunes Sandy
Keck School of Medicine of USC, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Department of Ophthalmology, USC Roski Eye Institute, Keck School of Medicine of USC, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Ultrasound. 2024 Feb;32(1):28-35. doi: 10.1177/1742271X231166895. Epub 2023 Apr 29.
Point-of-care ultrasound is becoming increasingly popular, and we sought to examine its role in evaluating ocular and periocular structures and facial vasculature. With the large number of point-of-care ultrasound devices available, it is difficult to determine which devices may be best suited for ophthalmic and facial aesthetic applications. This study compares five popular handheld point-of-care ultrasound devices to help guide clinicians in choosing the device best suited for their needs.
We compared five point-of-care ultrasound devices: Butterfly IQ+ (Butterfly, Burlington, MA), L15 (Clarius Mobile Health, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada), L20 (Clarius Mobile Health, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada), Lumify (Philips, Amsterdam, Netherlands) and Vscan Air (GE, Boston, MA). Three ophthalmologists obtained the following views on three volunteers: eight arteries, four ocular and periocular structures and areas of filler injections. The image quality of each view was graded on a four-point Likert-type scale. In addition, graders filled out a survey. The data were analysed using analysis of variance tests with the significance level set to < 0.05.
In terms of overall image quality, the L20 received the highest mean rating, followed by the L15, Vscan Air, Butterfly IQ+ and the Lumify ( < 0.05). With further stratification for structure type, the L20 was ranked first for filler, artery and orbital imaging ( < 0.05).
The L20 received the highest image quality rankings. While image quality is an important aspect of point-of-care ultrasound device selection, other factors such as cost, wireless capabilities, range of presets and battery life should also be considered.
即时超声检查越来越受欢迎,我们试图研究其在评估眼部和眼周结构以及面部血管系统中的作用。由于有大量的即时超声设备可供选择,很难确定哪些设备可能最适合眼科和面部美学应用。本研究比较了五种流行的手持式即时超声设备,以帮助指导临床医生选择最适合其需求的设备。
我们比较了五种即时超声设备:Butterfly IQ+(Butterfly公司,马萨诸塞州伯灵顿)、L15(Clarius Mobile Health公司,加拿大不列颠哥伦比亚省温哥华)、L20(Clarius Mobile Health公司,加拿大不列颠哥伦比亚省温哥华)、Lumify(飞利浦公司,荷兰阿姆斯特丹)和Vscan Air(通用电气公司,马萨诸塞州波士顿)。三位眼科医生对三名志愿者进行了以下检查:八条动脉、四个眼部和眼周结构以及填充剂注射区域。每个视图的图像质量按照四点李克特量表进行评分。此外,评分者填写了一份调查问卷。使用方差分析对数据进行分析,显著性水平设定为<0.05。
在整体图像质量方面,L20的平均评分最高,其次是L15、Vscan Air、Butterfly IQ+和Lumify(<0.05)。进一步按结构类型分层后,L20在填充剂、动脉和眼眶成像方面排名第一(<0.05)。
L20的图像质量排名最高。虽然图像质量是即时超声设备选择的一个重要方面,但还应考虑其他因素,如成本、无线功能、预设范围和电池寿命。