Key result
Subclavian Doppler ultrasound shows low agreement with precordial monitoring for grading venous gas emboli.
Why the study?
Precordial Doppler monitoring is noisy and difficult to grade, whereas subclavian monitoring provides unambiguous signals, prompting an evaluation of agreement between both sites.
Does subclavian Doppler ultrasound monitoring agree with precordial monitoring for detecting venous gas emboli following decompression from dives?
Observational (n=453)
Does subclavian Doppler ultrasound monitoring agree with precordial monitoring for detecting venous gas emboli following decompression from dives?
There is a large discrepancy between precordial and subclavian Doppler ultrasound venous gas emboli grades, suggesting both positions should be monitored for a comprehensive assessment of bubble load.
Poor agreement between precordial and subclavian Doppler grades warrants caution with single-site monitoring; leaves open whether dual-site use improves bubble load assessment.
Introduction: Doppler ultrasound is used to detect inert gas bubbles in the body following decompression from dives. Two sites may be monitored, the precordial (PC) and subclavian (SC) positions. PC is the predominant site, allowing observation of bubbles returning from the entire body. However, the SC site provides unambiguous signals, whereas the PC site is noisy and difficult to grade. This retrospective study compared agreement of PC and SC Doppler data. Methods: Datasets from the large University of California at San Diego Doppler database were graded on the Kisman Masurel (KM) scale and included: one PC measurement at rest followed by three during movement (n = 4 measurements); this was repeated for the left (n = 4 measurements) and right (n = 4 measurements) SC veins, producing a set of 12 grades. Primary analysis included: agreement between resting PC and SC grades, between movement PC and SC grades, and for unmatched grades, whether the SC grade was higher or lower than PC. Results: Four-hundred and fifty-three datasets were available (5,436 individual recordings). At rest, 281 (62.0%) PC and SC grades matched (weighted kappa agreement 0.33, 95% CI ± 0.04), while only 176 (38.9%) movement grades matched (0.29, ± 0.02). Of the unmatched data, resting SC grades were higher than PC in 70.3% and lower in 29.6%; after movement, SC grades were higher in 45.8% and lower in 54.2%. Conclusions: These data revealed a large discrepancy between PC and SC grades. Overall, this suggests that Doppler observations from both positions will give the most comprehensive representation of bubble load.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Blogg et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Venous gas emboli following decompression from dives (n=453). Precordial Doppler ultrasound vs. Subclavian Doppler ultrasound was evaluated on Agreement between precordial and subclavian Doppler ultrasound grades at rest and during movement (weighted kappa 0.33, 95% CI ± 0.04). Precordial and subclavian Doppler ultrasound grades for venous gas emboli showed low agreement, matching in 62.0% of cases at rest (kappa 0.33) and 38.9% during movement (kappa 0.29).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: