Comparing the Sensitivity of a Low Frequency Versus a High Frequency Probe in the Detection of Pneumothorax in a Swine Model.

Melissa Myers, Amie Billstrom, Jared Cohen, Ryan Curtis
{"title":"Comparing the Sensitivity of a Low Frequency Versus a High Frequency Probe in the Detection of Pneumothorax in a Swine Model.","authors":"Melissa Myers,&nbsp;Amie Billstrom,&nbsp;Jared Cohen,&nbsp;Ryan Curtis","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Correct diagnosis of pneumothorax in trauma patients is essential. Under-diagnosis can lead to development of life-threatening tension pneumothorax, but overdiagnosis leads to placement of unnecessary chest tubes with potential related morbidity and pain. It is unclear from previous work if there is a benefit to switching from the phased array (low frequency) probe to the linear (high frequency) probe. Is the improvement in image quality worth the time lost changing probes?</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We compared the sensitivity and specificity of a low frequency and high frequency ultrasound probe for the detection of pneumothorax. Images were obtained using swine models and were interpreted by Emergency Medicine residents, attendings, and physician assistants.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found a specificity of 89% and sensitivity of 99% for the low frequency probe and specificity of 96% and sensitivity of 99% for the high frequency probe. There was a statistically different specificity between the two probes, suggesting that the linear probe may be the superior probe for confirming the presence of pneumothorax.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We conclude switching to the linear probe for the thoracic portion of the Extended-Focused Assessment in Trauma will lead to more accurate diagnosis of pneumothorax and decreased false-positive exams.</p>","PeriodicalId":74148,"journal":{"name":"Medical journal (Fort Sam Houston, Tex.)","volume":" PB 8-21-07/08/09","pages":"13-19"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical journal (Fort Sam Houston, Tex.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","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

Background: Correct diagnosis of pneumothorax in trauma patients is essential. Under-diagnosis can lead to development of life-threatening tension pneumothorax, but overdiagnosis leads to placement of unnecessary chest tubes with potential related morbidity and pain. It is unclear from previous work if there is a benefit to switching from the phased array (low frequency) probe to the linear (high frequency) probe. Is the improvement in image quality worth the time lost changing probes?

Methods: We compared the sensitivity and specificity of a low frequency and high frequency ultrasound probe for the detection of pneumothorax. Images were obtained using swine models and were interpreted by Emergency Medicine residents, attendings, and physician assistants.

Results: We found a specificity of 89% and sensitivity of 99% for the low frequency probe and specificity of 96% and sensitivity of 99% for the high frequency probe. There was a statistically different specificity between the two probes, suggesting that the linear probe may be the superior probe for confirming the presence of pneumothorax.

Conclusion: We conclude switching to the linear probe for the thoracic portion of the Extended-Focused Assessment in Trauma will lead to more accurate diagnosis of pneumothorax and decreased false-positive exams.

低频与高频探头检测猪模型气胸的灵敏度比较。
背景:创伤患者气胸的正确诊断至关重要。诊断不足可导致危及生命的紧张性气胸的发展,但过度诊断导致放置不必要的胸管与潜在的相关发病率和疼痛。从以前的工作中还不清楚从相控阵(低频)探头切换到线性(高频)探头是否有好处。为了提高图像质量而花费更换探头的时间值得吗?方法:比较低频与高频超声探头检测气胸的敏感性和特异性。使用猪模型获得图像,并由急诊医学住院医师、主治医师和医师助理进行解释。结果:低频探针特异性为89%,灵敏度为99%,高频探针特异性为96%,灵敏度为99%。两种探针的特异性有统计学差异,提示线形探针可能是确认气胸存在的首选探针。结论:我们的结论是,在创伤扩展聚焦评估中,将胸椎部分转换为线性探头将有助于更准确地诊断气胸并减少假阳性检查。
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
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