Wireless vs. traditional ultrasound assessed knee cartilage outcomes utilizing automated gain and normalization techniques

Arjun Parmar , Corey D Grozier , Robert Dima , Jessica E Tolzman , Ilker Hacihaliloglu , Kenneth L Cameron , Ryan Fajardo , Matthew S Harkey
{"title":"Wireless vs. traditional ultrasound assessed knee cartilage outcomes utilizing automated gain and normalization techniques","authors":"Arjun Parmar ,&nbsp;Corey D Grozier ,&nbsp;Robert Dima ,&nbsp;Jessica E Tolzman ,&nbsp;Ilker Hacihaliloglu ,&nbsp;Kenneth L Cameron ,&nbsp;Ryan Fajardo ,&nbsp;Matthew S Harkey","doi":"10.1016/j.ostima.2024.100260","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Advancements in wireless ultrasound technology allow for point of care cartilage imaging, yet validation against traditional ultrasound units remains to be established for knee cartilage outcomes. Therefore, the purpose of our study was to establish the replicability, reliability and agreement, of articular cartilage thickness and echo-intensity measures between traditional and wireless ultrasound units utilizing automatic-gain and normalization techniques. We used traditional and wireless ultrasound to assess the femoral cartilage via transverse suprapatellar scans with the knee in maximum flexion in 71 female NCAA Division I athletes (age: 20.0 ± 1.3 years, height: 171.7 ± 8.7 cm, mass: 69.4 ± 11.0 kg). Wireless ultrasound images (auto-gain and standard gain) were compared to traditional ultrasound images (standard gain) before and after normalization. Ultrasound image pixel values were algebraically scaled to normalize differences between units in image acquisition. Mean thickness and echo-intensity of the global and sub-regions of interest were measured across imaging parameters. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC<sub>2,</sub><em><sub>k</sub></em>) for reliability, standard error of the measurement, minimum detectable difference, and Bland-Altman plots for agreement were calculated between ultrasound units across imaging parameters. Cartilage thickness demonstrated good to excellent reliability (ICC<sub>2,</sub><em><sub>k</sub></em> = 0.83–0.95) and minimal bias (-0.06–0.03 mm), in all regions regardless of gain and normalization. However, mean echo-intensity demonstrated poor to moderate reliability (ICC<sub>2,</sub><em><sub>k</sub></em> = 0.23–0.68) and moderate bias (-9.8–6.5 au) in all regions, regardless of gain and normalization. While there was a high level of replicability between units when assessing cartilage thickness, further research in ultrasound beam forming may lead to improvements in replicability of cartilage echo-intensity between ultrasound units.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74378,"journal":{"name":"Osteoarthritis imaging","volume":"5 1","pages":"Article 100260"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Osteoarthritis imaging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772654124000941","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Advancements in wireless ultrasound technology allow for point of care cartilage imaging, yet validation against traditional ultrasound units remains to be established for knee cartilage outcomes. Therefore, the purpose of our study was to establish the replicability, reliability and agreement, of articular cartilage thickness and echo-intensity measures between traditional and wireless ultrasound units utilizing automatic-gain and normalization techniques. We used traditional and wireless ultrasound to assess the femoral cartilage via transverse suprapatellar scans with the knee in maximum flexion in 71 female NCAA Division I athletes (age: 20.0 ± 1.3 years, height: 171.7 ± 8.7 cm, mass: 69.4 ± 11.0 kg). Wireless ultrasound images (auto-gain and standard gain) were compared to traditional ultrasound images (standard gain) before and after normalization. Ultrasound image pixel values were algebraically scaled to normalize differences between units in image acquisition. Mean thickness and echo-intensity of the global and sub-regions of interest were measured across imaging parameters. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC2,k) for reliability, standard error of the measurement, minimum detectable difference, and Bland-Altman plots for agreement were calculated between ultrasound units across imaging parameters. Cartilage thickness demonstrated good to excellent reliability (ICC2,k = 0.83–0.95) and minimal bias (-0.06–0.03 mm), in all regions regardless of gain and normalization. However, mean echo-intensity demonstrated poor to moderate reliability (ICC2,k = 0.23–0.68) and moderate bias (-9.8–6.5 au) in all regions, regardless of gain and normalization. While there was a high level of replicability between units when assessing cartilage thickness, further research in ultrasound beam forming may lead to improvements in replicability of cartilage echo-intensity between ultrasound units.
无线超声和传统超声利用自动增益和归一化技术评估膝关节软骨的预后
无线超声技术的进步使点护理软骨成像成为可能,但传统超声设备对膝关节软骨结果的验证仍有待建立。因此,我们研究的目的是利用自动增益和归一化技术,在传统和无线超声装置之间建立关节软骨厚度和回声强度测量的可复制性、可靠性和一致性。我们对71名NCAA一级赛区女性运动员(年龄:20.0±1.3岁,身高:171.7±8.7 cm,体重:69.4±11.0 kg)进行膝最大屈曲时的髌上横向扫描,采用传统超声和无线超声评估股骨软骨。将归一化前后的无线超声图像(自动增益和标准增益)与传统超声图像(标准增益)进行比较。超声图像像素值的代数缩放,以归一化在图像采集单位之间的差异。通过成像参数测量感兴趣的全局和子区域的平均厚度和回波强度。计算跨成像参数的超声单元之间的可靠性相关系数(ICC2,k)、测量标准误差、最小可检测差异和Bland-Altman图的一致性。无论增益和归一化如何,软骨厚度在所有区域均表现出良好至优异的可靠性(ICC2,k = 0.83-0.95)和最小偏差(-0.06-0.03 mm)。然而,无论增益和归一化如何,平均回波强度在所有区域都表现出较差至中等的可靠性(ICC2,k = 0.23-0.68)和中等偏倚(-9.8-6.5 au)。虽然在评估软骨厚度时,单元之间的可重复性很高,但对超声束形成的进一步研究可能会提高超声单元之间软骨回声强度的可重复性。
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
Osteoarthritis imaging
Osteoarthritis imaging Radiology and Imaging
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信