Why the study?
Stroke volume estimation using LVOT VTI is key in haemodynamically unstable ICU patients, and AI-guided ultrasound may facilitate adequate image acquisition, but the interchangeability of measurements by minimally trained operators versus experts remains to be evaluated.
Does AI-guided LVOT VTI measurement by minimally trained operators provide interchangeable results with expert measurements in ICU patients requiring fluid administration?
Does AI-guided LVOT VTI measurement by minimally trained operators provide interchangeable results with expert measurements in ICU patients requiring fluid administration?
This protocol outlines a trial to determine if AI-guided LVOT VTI measurements by minimally trained operators are interchangeable with expert measurements in ICU patients.
INTRODUCTION: Stroke volume is a major determinant of tissue perfusion and, therefore, a key parameter to monitor in patients with haemodynamic instability and hypoperfusion. Left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) velocity-time integral (VTI) measurement using pulsed-wave Doppler is widely used as an estimation of stroke volume and should be a competence required for every intensive care unit (ICU) physician. Artificial intelligence (AI) applied to ultrasound facilitates the acquisition of adequate images. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the interchangeability of LVOT VTI measurements obtained by minimally trained operators and expert physicians, both guided by AI. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a prospective multicentre randomised controlled trial. ICU patients in whom fluid administration is considered necessary will be included. A minimally trained operator and an expert will independently measure LVOT VTI, guided by the UltraSight AI software to obtain the best five-chamber view, before and after a 250 mL fluid challenge. The order of acquisition between each operator will be randomised. 100 patients will be included.The primary endpoint is the relative difference in LVOT VTI between operators. Secondary outcomes include the concordance of the therapeutic decision made by the blinded physician in charge of the patient based on the measures obtained by each operator, and the agreement between absolute values of LVOT VTI obtained by minimally trained and expert operators. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been reviewed and approved by a regional ethics committee (Comité de Protection des Personnes-Ile de France II-n°24.00671.000291). An information note will be given to the participant before he or she participates in the study. The present study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and academic and medical conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06486467.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Levy et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: