Sonographic transvaginal bladder wall thickness: Does the measurement discriminate between urodynamic diagnoses?

Measurement of bladder wall thickness (BWT) using transvaginal ultrasound has previously been shown to discriminate between women with confirmed detrusor overactivity and those with urodynamic stress incontinence. Aim of the current study was to determine if vaginally measured BWT correlates with urodynamic diagnoses in a female population.

How should bladder wall thickness be measured? A comparison of vaginal, perineal and abdominal ultrasound

Measurement of bladder wall thickness using transvaginal ultrasound has previously been shown to discriminate between women with diagnosed detrusor overactivity and those with urodynamic stress incontinence. So far, no comparison has been made between abdominal, perineal and vaginal route for the measurement of bladder wall thickness. The aim of this prospective study was to determine if abdominal, perineal and vaginal ultrasound measurements of bladder wall thickness are comparable with each other.

Sonographic Assessment of Fetal Cardiac Function: Introduction and Direct Measurement of Cardiac Function

Noninvasive blood flow measurements based on Doppler ultrasound studies are the main clinical tool for studying the cardiovascular status in fetuses at risk for circulatory compromise. Usually, qualitative analysis of peripheral arteries and, in particular clinical situations such as severe growth restriction or volume overload, also of venous vessels close to the heart or of flow patterns in the heart are being used to gauge the level of compensation in a fetus. Quantitative assessment of the driving force of the fetal circulation, the cardiac output, however, remains an elusive goal in fetal medicine. This article reviews the methods for direct and indirect assessment of cardiac function and explains new clinical applications. Part 1 of this review describes the concept of cardiac function and cardiac output and the techniques that have been used to quantify output. Part 2 summarizes the use of arterial and venous Doppler studies in the fetus and gives a detailed description of indirect measures of cardiac function (like indices derived from the duration of segments of the cardiac cycle) with current examples of their application.

Ultrasound assessment of detrusor thickness in men-can it predict bladder outlet obstruction and replace pressure flow study?

PURPOSE: We estimated the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound detrusor thickness measurement for BOO and investigated whether this method can replace PFS for the diagnosis of BOO in some patients with lower urinary tract symptoms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Detrusor thickness was measured by linear ultrasound (7.5 MHz) at a filling volume of greater than 50% of cystometric capacity in 102 men undergoing PFS for LUTS. All patients with prior treatment for bladder outlet obstruction and those with underlying neurological disorders were excluded from analysis. Detrusor thickness was correlated with PFS data. Obstruction was defined according to the Abrams-Griffiths nomogram. RESULTS: Detrusor thickness was significantly higher (p <0.0001) in obstructed (61 cases, median detrusor thickness 2.7 mm, IQR 2.4 to 3.3) compared to unobstructed (18 cases, median detrusor thickness 1.7 mm, IQR 1.5 to 2) as well as equivocal (23 cases, median detrusor thickness 1.8 mm, IQR 1.5 to 2.2) cases. A weak to medium Spearman correlation was found between detrusor thickness and PFS parameters. For a diagnosis of BOO, detrusor thickness of 2.9 mm or greater had a positive predictive value of 100%, a negative predictive value of 54%, specificity of 100% and sensitivity of 43%. ROC analysis revealed that detrusor thickness had a high predictive value for BOO with an AUC of 0.88 (95% CI 0.81-0.94). CONCLUSIONS: In men with LUTS without prior treatment and/or neurological disorders, ultrasonographically assessed detrusor thickness 2.9 mm or greater has a high predictive value for BOO and can replace PFS for the diagnosis of BOO. However, this cutoff value needs to be validated in a larger study population.

Prediction of hip fracture risk by quantitative ultrasound in more than 7000 Swiss women > or =70 years of age: comparison of three technologically different bone ultrasound devices in the SEMOF study

To compare the prediction of hip fracture risk of several bone ultrasounds (QUS), 7062 Swiss women > or =70 years of age were measured with three QUSs (two of the heel, one of the phalanges). Heel QUSs were both predictive of hip fracture risk, whereas the phalanges QUS was not. INTRODUCTION: As the number of hip fracture is expected to increase during these next decades, it is important to develop strategies to detect subjects at risk. Quantitative bone ultrasound (QUS), an ionizing radiation-free method, which is transportable, could be interesting for this purpose. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Swiss Evaluation of the Methods of Measurement of Osteoporotic Fracture Risk (SEMOF) study is a multicenter cohort study, which compared three QUSs for the assessment of hip fracture risk in a sample of 7609 elderly ambulatory women > or =70 years of age. Two QUSs measured the heel (Achilles+; GE-Lunar and Sahara; Hologic), and one measured the heel (DBM Sonic 1200; IGEA). The Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate the hazard of the first hip fracture, adjusted for age, BMI, and center, and the area under the ROC curves were calculated to compare the devices and their parameters. RESULTS: From the 7609 women who were included in the study, 7062 women 75.2 +/- 3.1 (SD) years of age were prospectively followed for 2.9 +/- 0.8 years. Eighty women reported a hip fracture. A decrease by 1 SD of the QUS variables corresponded to an increase of the hip fracture risk from 2.3 (95% CI, 1.7, 3.1) to 2.6 (95% CI, 1.9, 3.4) for the three variables of Achilles+ and from 2.2 (95% CI, 1.7, 3.0) to 2.4 (95% CI, 1.8, 3.2) for the three variables of Sahara. Risk gradients did not differ significantly among the variables of the two heel QUS devices. On the other hand, the phalanges QUS (DBM Sonic 1200) was not predictive of hip fracture risk, with an adjusted hazard risk of 1.2 (95% CI, 0.9, 1.5), even after reanalysis of the digitalized data and using different cut-off levels (1700 or 1570 m/s). CONCLUSIONS: In this elderly women population, heel QUS devices were both predictive of hip fracture risk, whereas the phalanges QUS device was not.

Ultrasound-guided needle positioning in sensory nerve conduction study of the sural nerve

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the usefulness of ultrasound imaging to improve the positioning of the recording needle for nerve conduction studies (NCS) of the sural nerve. METHODS: Orthodromic NCS of the sural nerve was performed in 44 consecutive patients evaluated for polyneuropathy. Ultrasound-guided needle positioning (USNP) was compared to conventional "blind" needle positioning (BNP), electrically guided needle positioning (EGNP), and to recordings with surface electrodes (SFN). RESULTS: The mean distance between the needle tip and the nerve was 1.1 mm with USNP compared to 5.1 mm with BNP (p<0.0001). The mean amplitude of the sensory nerve action potential (SNAP) was 21 microV with USNP and 11 microV with BNP (p<0.0001). Compared to BNP, nerve-needle distances and SNAP amplitudes did not improve with EGNP. SNAP amplitudes recorded with SFN were significantly smaller than with BNP, EGNP and USNP. CONCLUSION: Ultrasound increases the precision of needle positioning markedly, compared to conventional methods. The amplitude of the recorded SNAP is usually clearly greater using USNP. In addition, USNP is faster, less painful and less dependent on the patient. SIGNIFICANCE: USNP is superior to BNP, EGNP, and SFN in accurate measurement of SNAP amplitude. It has a potential use in the routine near-nerve needle sensory NCS of pure sensory nerves.

Measuring finger joint cartilage by ultrasound as a promising alternative to conventional radiograph imaging

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the reliability and validity of a novel ultrasound (US) imaging method to measure metacarpophalangeal (MCP) and proximal interphalangeal (PIP) finger joint cartilage. METHODS: We examined 48 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), 18 patients with osteoarthritis (OA), 24 patients with unclassified arthritis of the finger joints, and 34 healthy volunteers. The proximal cartilage layer of MCP and PIP joints for fingers 2-5 was bilaterally visualized from a posterior view, with joints in approximately 90 degrees flexion. Cartilage thickness was measured with integrated tools on static images. External validity was assessed by measuring radiologic joint space width (JSW) and a numeric joint space narrowing (JSN) score in patients with RA. RESULTS: Precise measurement was possible for 97.5% of MCP and 94.2% of PIP joints. Intraclass correlation coefficients for bilateral total joint US scores were 0.844 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.648-0.935) for interobserver comparisons and 0.928 (95% CI 0.826-0.971) for intraobserver comparisons (using different US devices). The US score correlated with JSN for both hands (adjusted R(2) = 0.513, P < 0.001) and JSW of the same finger joints (adjusted R(2) = 0.635, P < 0.001). Reduced cartilage shown by US allowed discrimination of early symptomatic OA versus early RA and healthy joints. In patients with RA, US scores correlated with duration of treatment-resistant, progressive RA. CONCLUSION: The US method of direct visualization and quantification of cartilage in MCP and PIP joints is objective, reliable, valid, and can be useful for diagnostic purposes in patients with arthritis.

How well do radiographic absorptiometry and quantitative ultrasound predict osteoporosis at spine or hip? A cost-effectiveness analysis

Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is widely accepted as the reference method for diagnosis and monitoring of osteoporosis and for assessment of fracture risk, especially at hip. However, axial-DXA is not suitable for mass screening, because it is usually confined to specialized centers. We propose a two-step diagnostic approach to postmenopausal osteoporosis: the first step, using an inexpensive, widely available screening technique, aims at risk stratification in postmenopausal women; the second step, DXA of spine and hip is applied only to potentially osteoporotic women preselected on the basis of the screening measurement. In a group of 110 healthy postmenopausal woman, the capability of various peripheral bone measurement techniques to predict osteoporosis at spine and/or hip (T-score < -2.5SD using DXA) was tested using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves: radiographic absorptiometry of phalanges (RA), ultrasonometry at calcaneus (QUS. CALC), tibia (SOS.TIB), and phalanges (SOS.PHAL). Thirty-three women had osteoporosis at spine and/or hip with DXA. Areas under the ROC curves were 0.84 for RA, 0.83 for QUS.CALC, 0.77 for SOS.PHAL (p < 0.04 vs RA) and 0.74 for SOS.TIB (p < 0.02 vs RA and p = 0.05 vs QUS.CALC). For levels of sensitivity of 90%, the respective specificities were 67% (RA), 64% (QUS.CALC), 48% (SOS.PHAL), and 39% (SOS.TIB). In a cost-effective two-step, the price of the first step should not exceed 54% (RA), 51% (QUS.CALC), 42% (SOS.PHAL), and 25% (SOS.TIB). In conclusion, RA, QUS.CALC, SOS.PHAL, and SOS.TIB may be useful to preselect postmenopausal women in whom axial DXA is indicated to confirm/exclude osteoporosis at spine or hip.

Quality controls for two heel bone ultrasounds used in the Swiss Evaluation of the Methods of Measurement of Osteoporotic Fracture Risk Study

Because of the important morbidity and mortality associated with osteoporosis, it is essential to detect subjects at risk by screening methods, such as bone quantitative ultrasounds (QUSs). Several studies showed that QUS could predict fractures. None, however, compared prospectively different QUS devices, and few data of quality controls (QCs) have been published. The Swiss Evaluation of the Methods of Measurement of Osteoporotic Fracture Risk is a prospective multicenter study that compared three QUSs for the assessment of hip fracture risk in a population of 7609 women age >/=70 yr. Because the inclusion phase lasted 20 mo, and because 10 centers participated in this study, QC became a major issue. We therefore developed a QC procedure to assess the stability and precision of the devices, and for their cross-calibration. Our study focuses on the two heel QUSs. The water bath system (Achilles+) had a higher precision than the dry system (Sahara). The QC results were highly dependent on temperature. QUS stability was acceptable, but Sahara must be calibrated regularly. A sufficient homogeneity among all the Sahara devices could be demonstrated, whereas significant differences were found among the Achilles+ devices. For speed of sound, 52% of the differences among the Achilles+ was explained by the water s temperature. However, for broadband ultrasound attenuation, a maximal difference of 23% persisted after adjustment for temperature. Because such differences could influence measurements in vivo, it is crucial to develop standardized phantoms to be used in prospective multicenter studies.

Correlation Between Sonographic and In Vivo Measurement of A1 Pulleys in Trigger Fingers

The thickness of 210 A1 pulleys of 21 male and female healthy volunteers in two different age groups (20-35 y and 50-70 y) were measured by ultrasound. In a second group, the thickness of 15 diseased A1 pulleys and 15 A1 pulleys of the corresponding other hand of 10 patients with the clinical diagnosis of trigger finger were measured by ultrasound. During open trigger finger release, a strip of A1 pulley was excised and immediately measured using an electronic caliper. The average pulley thickness of healthy volunteers was 0.43-0.47 mm, compared to 0.77-0.79 mm in patients with trigger finger. Based on the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, a diagnostic cut-off value of the pulley thickness at 0.62 mm was defined in order to differ a trigger finger from a healthy finger (sensitivity and specificity of 85%). The correlation between sonographic and effective intra-operative measurements of pulley thickness was linear and very strong (Pearson coefficient 0.86-0.90). In order to distinguish between healthy and diseased A1 pulleys, 0.62 mm is a simple value to use, which can be applied regardless of age, sex, body mass index (BMI) and height in adults.