Key result
Second-generation microtransesophageal transducer associated with ~100% reduction in clinically inadequate image quality vs original.
Why the study?
Transesophageal echocardiographic imaging of small infants has been limited by equipment size and hardware durability issues with the first-generation miniaturized transducer.
Does a second-generation microtransesophageal echocardiography transducer improve image quality compared to the original transducer in small infants undergoing TEE?
Observational (n=102)
Does a second-generation microtransesophageal echocardiography transducer improve image quality compared to the original transducer in small infants undergoing TEE?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The second-generation micro-TEE transducer significantly improves image quality and eliminates clinically inadequate imaging compared to the first-generation device in small infants.
BACKGROUND: Transesophageal echocardiographic imaging of small infants has been limited because of equipment size. A newer miniaturized transducer has allowed for the imaging of even the smallest patients but has been limited by intermittent poor image quality because of hardware durability. A second generation of the transducer was developed to address this problem. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance and durability of the second-generation transducer over multiple uses and to compare the image quality from the modified transducer and new software preset to the original transducer. METHODS: Patients undergoing transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) based on clinical indications with the original or second-generation transducers were included in the study. All studies were reviewed for image quality and unacceptable image degradation, which was defined as imaging quality inadequate for clinical use. Study review was performed by two echocardiographers. RESULTS: Using the original transducer, 37 studies were performed with a mean patient weight of 3.46±0.89 kg (range 2.1-5.7). Using the second-generation transducer, 65 studies were performed with a mean patient weight of 4.87±2.05 kg (range 2.2-13.8). Image quality was clinically inadequate in 8 of the 35 studies with the original transducer and in zero with the second generation (P<.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The second-generation transducer allows for effective use of TEE even in the smallest infants and avoids the mechanical failures associated with the first-generation release.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Frank et al. (2014) conducted an observational in Small infants requiring transesophageal echocardiography (n=102). Second-generation microtransesophageal echocardiography transducer and software vs. Original (first-generation) microtransesophageal transducer was evaluated on Clinically inadequate image quality (unacceptable image degradation) (p=<.0001). The second-generation microtransesophageal transducer eliminated clinically inadequate image quality compared to the original transducer (0% vs 22.9%; P<.0001).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: