Does hand-held ultrasound with automatic decision-making software provide feasible and reliable quantification of left ventricular function compared to reference echocardiography in outpatients with suspected heart failure?
Automatic quantification of left ventricular function using hand-held ultrasound devices showed modest feasibility and reliability across different user experience levels, suggesting it requires further refinement before clinical implementation.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the feasibility and reliability of hand-held ultrasound (HUD) examinations with real-time automatic decision-making software for ejection fraction (autoEF) and mitral annular plane systolic excursion (autoMAPSE) by novices (general practitioners), intermediate users (registered cardiac nurses) and expert users (cardiologists), respectively, compared to reference echocardiography by cardiologists in an outpatient cohort with suspected heart failure (HF). DESIGN: Feasibility study of a diagnostic test. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 166 patients with suspected HF underwent HUD examinations with autoEF and autoMAPSE measurements by five novices, three intermediate-skilled users and five experts. HUD results were compared with a reference echocardiography by experts. A blinded cardiologist scored all HUD recordings with automatic measurements as (1) discard, (2) accept, but adjust the measurement or (3) accept the measurement as it is. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: The feasibility of automatic decision-making software for quantification of left ventricular function. RESULTS: The users were able to run autoEF and autoMAPSE in most patients. The feasibility for obtaining accepted images (score of ≥2) with automatic measurements ranged from 50% to 91%. The feasibility was lowest for novices and highest for experts for both autoEF and autoMAPSE (p≤0.001). Large coefficients of variation and wide coefficients of repeatability indicate moderate agreement. The corresponding intraclass correlations (ICC) were moderate to good (ICC 0.51-0.85) for intra-rater and poor (ICC 0.35-0.51) for inter-rater analyses. The findings of modest to poor agreement and reliability were not explained by the experience of the users alone. CONCLUSION: Novices, intermediate and expert users were able to record four-chamber views for automatic assessment of autoEF and autoMAPSE using HUD devices. The modest feasibility, agreement and reliability suggest this should not be implemented into clinical practice without further refinement and clinical evaluation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03547076.
Hjorth‐Hansen et al. (Sat,) studied this question.