We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Observational Study
Pragmatic Evaluation of a Deep-Learning Algorithm to Automate Ejection Fraction on Hand-Held, Point-of-Care Echocardiography in a Cardiac Surgical Operating Room.
OBJECTIVE: To test the correlation of ejection fraction (EF) estimated by a deep-learning-based, automated algorithm (Auto EF) versus an EF estimated by Simpson's method.
DESIGN: A prospective observational study.
SETTING: A single-center study at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania.
PARTICIPANTS: Study participants were ≥18 years of age and scheduled to undergo valve, aortic, coronary artery bypass graft, heart, or lung transplant surgery.
INTERVENTIONS: This noninterventional study involved acquiring apical 4-chamber transthoracic echocardiographic clips using the Philips hand-held ultrasound device, Lumify.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In the primary analysis of 54 clips, compared to Simpson's method for EF estimation, bias was similar for Auto EF (-10.17%) and the experienced reader-estimated EF (-9.82%), but the correlation was lower for Auto EF (r = 0.56) than the experienced reader-estimated EF (r = 0.80). In the secondary analyses, the correlation between EF estimated by Simpson's method and Auto EF increased when applied to 27 acquisitions classified as adequate (r = 0.86), but decreased when applied to 27 acquisitions classified as inadequate (r = 0.46).
CONCLUSIONS: Applied to acquisitions of adequate image quality, Auto EF produced a numerical EF estimate equivalent to Simpson's method. However, when applied to acquisitions of inadequate image quality, discrepancies arose between EF estimated by Auto EF and Simpson's method. Visual EF estimates by experienced readers correlated highly with Simpson's method in both variable and inadequate imaging conditions, emphasizing its enduring clinical utility.
DESIGN: A prospective observational study.
SETTING: A single-center study at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania.
PARTICIPANTS: Study participants were ≥18 years of age and scheduled to undergo valve, aortic, coronary artery bypass graft, heart, or lung transplant surgery.
INTERVENTIONS: This noninterventional study involved acquiring apical 4-chamber transthoracic echocardiographic clips using the Philips hand-held ultrasound device, Lumify.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In the primary analysis of 54 clips, compared to Simpson's method for EF estimation, bias was similar for Auto EF (-10.17%) and the experienced reader-estimated EF (-9.82%), but the correlation was lower for Auto EF (r = 0.56) than the experienced reader-estimated EF (r = 0.80). In the secondary analyses, the correlation between EF estimated by Simpson's method and Auto EF increased when applied to 27 acquisitions classified as adequate (r = 0.86), but decreased when applied to 27 acquisitions classified as inadequate (r = 0.46).
CONCLUSIONS: Applied to acquisitions of adequate image quality, Auto EF produced a numerical EF estimate equivalent to Simpson's method. However, when applied to acquisitions of inadequate image quality, discrepancies arose between EF estimated by Auto EF and Simpson's method. Visual EF estimates by experienced readers correlated highly with Simpson's method in both variable and inadequate imaging conditions, emphasizing its enduring clinical utility.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System: From History to Practice of a Secular Topic.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 5
Prevention and treatment of ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke in people with diabetes mellitus: a focus on glucose control and comorbidities.Diabetologia 2024 April 17
British Society for Rheumatology guideline on management of adult and juvenile onset Sjögren disease.Rheumatology 2024 April 17
Albumin: a comprehensive review and practical guideline for clinical use.European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2024 April 13
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app