Assessment of volume flow rate in arteriovenous fistulas with a novel ultrasound Doppler device (earlybird): Trend analysis, comparison of methods, and inter- and intra-rater reliability.

IF 1.6 3区 医学 Q3 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Journal of Vascular Access Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-06 DOI:10.1177/11297298241250379
Emilie Holst-Jæger, Marthe Barstad, Øyvind Salvesen, Hans Torp, Arne Seternes, Erik Mulder Pettersen
{"title":"Assessment of volume flow rate in arteriovenous fistulas with a novel ultrasound Doppler device (earlybird): Trend analysis, comparison of methods, and inter- and intra-rater reliability.","authors":"Emilie Holst-Jæger, Marthe Barstad, Øyvind Salvesen, Hans Torp, Arne Seternes, Erik Mulder Pettersen","doi":"10.1177/11297298241250379","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>An accessible tool is required to analyze volume flow trends in arteriovenous fistulas for hemodialysis. Earlybird, an easy-to-place ultrasound Doppler device, has shown comparable accuracy to duplex ultrasound. In this study, we compared volume flow measurements obtained with duplex ultrasound and the dilution technique to an enhanced earlybird device, featuring a dual Doppler probe system, eliminating the requirement for a known insonation angle.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Nine patients with a distal radiocephalic arteriovenous fistula were monitored for 12 months with regular volume flow measurements. Correlation and inter- and intra-class reliability analyses were conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>An overall moderate correlation was observed between earlybird and duplex ultrasound or dilution technique (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.606 (95% confidence interval 0.064, 0.721) and 0.581 (0.039, 0.739), respectively). Duplex ultrasound compared to dilution measurements, demonstrated an overall moderate correlation (0.725 (0.219, 0.843)). Correlation between earlybird and duplex ultrasound was stronger for the arteriovenous fistula (0.778 (0.016, 0.901)) than the brachial artery (0.381 (-0.062, 0.461)). For earlybird, inter-rater reliability was excellent for the arteriovenous fistula (0.907 (0.423, 0.930)) and poor for the brachial artery (0.430 (0.241, 0.716)). Duplex ultrasound showed a good inter-rater reliability (arteriovenous fistula: 0.843 (0.610, 0.871), brachial artery: 0.819 (0.477, 0.864)). The overall intra-rater reliability was good for duplex ultrasound (rater A: 0.893 (0.727, 0.911); rater B: 0.853 (0.710, 0.891)), while excellent for earlybird (rater A: 0.905 (0.819, 0.928); rater B: 0.921 (0.632, 0.969)).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We observed a weaker correlation in the measurements of volume flow rates in arteriovenous fistulas when obtained using earlybird compared to dilution technique, unlike the comparison between duplex ultrasound and the dilution technique. However, inter-rater reliability for the arteriovenous fistula was excellent with earlybird and good with duplex ultrasound, indicating the potential of earlybird as a tool for frequent measurements, enabling trend surveillance and predicting adverse outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":56113,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Vascular Access","volume":" ","pages":"862-870"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12117123/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Vascular Access","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/11297298241250379","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: An accessible tool is required to analyze volume flow trends in arteriovenous fistulas for hemodialysis. Earlybird, an easy-to-place ultrasound Doppler device, has shown comparable accuracy to duplex ultrasound. In this study, we compared volume flow measurements obtained with duplex ultrasound and the dilution technique to an enhanced earlybird device, featuring a dual Doppler probe system, eliminating the requirement for a known insonation angle.

Methods: Nine patients with a distal radiocephalic arteriovenous fistula were monitored for 12 months with regular volume flow measurements. Correlation and inter- and intra-class reliability analyses were conducted.

Results: An overall moderate correlation was observed between earlybird and duplex ultrasound or dilution technique (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.606 (95% confidence interval 0.064, 0.721) and 0.581 (0.039, 0.739), respectively). Duplex ultrasound compared to dilution measurements, demonstrated an overall moderate correlation (0.725 (0.219, 0.843)). Correlation between earlybird and duplex ultrasound was stronger for the arteriovenous fistula (0.778 (0.016, 0.901)) than the brachial artery (0.381 (-0.062, 0.461)). For earlybird, inter-rater reliability was excellent for the arteriovenous fistula (0.907 (0.423, 0.930)) and poor for the brachial artery (0.430 (0.241, 0.716)). Duplex ultrasound showed a good inter-rater reliability (arteriovenous fistula: 0.843 (0.610, 0.871), brachial artery: 0.819 (0.477, 0.864)). The overall intra-rater reliability was good for duplex ultrasound (rater A: 0.893 (0.727, 0.911); rater B: 0.853 (0.710, 0.891)), while excellent for earlybird (rater A: 0.905 (0.819, 0.928); rater B: 0.921 (0.632, 0.969)).

Conclusion: We observed a weaker correlation in the measurements of volume flow rates in arteriovenous fistulas when obtained using earlybird compared to dilution technique, unlike the comparison between duplex ultrasound and the dilution technique. However, inter-rater reliability for the arteriovenous fistula was excellent with earlybird and good with duplex ultrasound, indicating the potential of earlybird as a tool for frequent measurements, enabling trend surveillance and predicting adverse outcomes.

使用新型超声多普勒设备(earlybird)评估动静脉瘘的容积流量:趋势分析、方法比较以及评分者之间和评分者内部的可靠性。
背景:需要一种方便的工具来分析血液透析动静脉瘘的血流量趋势。Earlybird是一种易于放置的超声多普勒设备,其准确性与双相超声相当。在这项研究中,我们将使用双工超声和稀释技术获得的血流量测量结果与增强型 Earlybird 设备进行了比较,后者具有双多普勒探头系统,无需已知的插入角度:方法:对九名远端动静脉瘘患者进行了为期 12 个月的定期血流量测量。对结果进行了相关性、类间和类内可靠性分析:结果:早鸟和双相超声或稀释技术之间总体上呈中度相关(类内相关系数分别为 0.606(95% 置信区间为 0.064,0.721)和 0.581(0.039,0.739))。双相超声与稀释测量相比,总体上显示出中等程度的相关性(0.725(0.219,0.843))。动静脉瘘(0.778 (0.016, 0.901))与肱动脉(0.381 (-0.062, 0.461))之间的相关性更强。就早鸟而言,动静脉瘘的评分者间可靠性极佳(0.907 (0.423, 0.930)),而肱动脉的评分者间可靠性较差(0.430 (0.241, 0.716))。双相超声显示评分者之间的可靠性良好(动静脉瘘:0.843 (0.610, 0.871),肱动脉:0.819 (0.477, 0.864))。双相超声的评分者内部总体可靠性良好(评分者 A:0.893 (0.727, 0.911);评分者 B:0.853 (0.710, 0.891)),而早鸟超声的评分者内部可靠性极佳(评分者 A:0.905 (0.819, 0.928);评分者 B:0.921 (0.632, 0.969)):与双工超声和稀释技术的比较不同,我们观察到使用早鸟技术和稀释技术测量动静脉瘘的容积流速时,两者之间的相关性较弱。然而,使用早搏仪测量动静脉瘘的评分者之间的可靠性极佳,而使用双相超声波测量的评分者之间的可靠性良好,这表明早搏仪作为一种频繁测量的工具具有潜力,可用于监测趋势和预测不良结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Vascular Access
Journal of Vascular Access 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
31.60%
发文量
181
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Vascular Access (JVA) is issued six times per year; it considers the publication of original manuscripts dealing with clinical and laboratory investigations in the fast growing field of vascular access. In addition reviews, case reports and clinical trials are welcome, as well as papers dedicated to more practical aspects covering new devices and techniques. All contributions, coming from all over the world, undergo the peer-review process. The Journal of Vascular Access is divided into independent sections, each led by Editors of the highest scientific level: • Dialysis • Oncology • Interventional radiology • Nutrition • Nursing • Intensive care Correspondence related to published papers is also welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信