Sonographer

Abstract: The purpose of this article is to present the practicing sonographer and sonologist with an overview of the biohazards of ultrasound and guidelines for safe use.

Abstract: Importance Artificial intelligence (AI) has been applied to analysis of medical imaging in recent years, but AI to guide the acquisition of ultrasonography images is a novel area of investigation. A novel deep-learning (DL) algorithm, trained on more than 5 million examples of the outcome of ultrasonographic probe movement on image quality, can provide real-time prescriptive guidance for novice operators to obtain limited diagnostic transthoracic echocardiographic images. Objective To test whether novice users could obtain 10-view transthoracic echocardiographic studies of diagnostic quality using this DL-based software. Design, Setting, and Participants This prospective, multicenter diagnostic study was conducted in 2 academic hospitals. A cohort of 8 nurses who had not previously conducted echocardiograms was recruited and trained with AI. Each nurse scanned 30 patients aged at least 18 years who were scheduled to undergo a clinically indicated echocardiogram at Northwestern Memorial Hospital or Minneapolis Heart Institute between March and May 2019. These scans were compared with those of sonographers using the same echocardiographic hardware but without AI guidance. Interventions Each patient underwent paired limited echocardiograms: one from a nurse without prior echocardiography experience using the DL algorithm and the other from a sonographer without the DL algorithm. Five level 3–trained echocardiographers independently and blindly evaluated each acquisition. Main Outcomes and Measures Four primary end points were sequentially assessed: qualitative judgement about left ventricular size and function, right ventricular size, and the presence of a pericardial effusion. Secondary end points included 6 other clinical parameters and comparison of scans by nurses vs sonographers. Results A total of 240 patients (mean [SD] age, 61 [16] years old; 139 men [57.9%]; 79 [32.9%] with body mass indexes >30) completed the study. Eight nurses each scanned 30 patients using the DL algorithm, producing studies judged to be of diagnostic quality for left ventricular size, function, and pericardial effusion in 237 of 240 cases (98.8%) and right ventricular size in 222 of 240 cases (92.5%). For the secondary end points, nurse and sonographer scans were not significantly different for most parameters. Conclusions and Relevance This DL algorithm allows novices without experience in ultrasonography to obtain diagnostic transthoracic echocardiographic studies for evaluation of left ventricular size and function, right ventricular size, and presence of a nontrivial pericardial effusion, expanding the reach of echocardiography to clinical settings in which immediate interrogation of anatomy and cardiac function is needed and settings with limited resources.

Abstract: Objectives To support standardization for performing dermatologic ultrasound examinations. Methods An international working group, called DERMUS (Dermatologic Ultrasound), was formed, composed of physicians who have been working on a regular basis and publishing in peer-reviewed articles on dermatologic ultrasound. A questionnaire on 5 critical issues about performance of the examinations was prepared and distributed by e-mail. The areas of discussion included technical aspects, main areas of application, minimum number of examinations per year required for assessing competence, qualifications of the personnel in charge of the examination, and organization of courses. Final recommendations were approved on the basis of the agreement of more than 50% of the members. Results The minimum frequency recommended for performing dermatologic examinations was 15 MHz. Routine use of color Doppler ultrasound and the performance of spectral curve analysis for assessing the main vascularity of lesions were suggested. Three-dimensional reconstructions were considered optional. The main dermatologic applications were benign tumors, skin cancer, vascular anomalies, cosmetic field, nail disorders, and inflammatory diseases. The minimum number of examinations per year suggested by the group for assessing competence was 300. A physician and not a sonographer was recommended to be the person in charge of performing the examination. On course organization, a minimum of 2 levels of complexity (basic and advanced) was suggested. Conclusions There is a need to standardize the performance and quality of dermatologic ultrasound examinations. The present guidelines written by an international group of specialists in the field may support this objective.

Abstract: Objective To describe the process of training for measuring nuchal translucency at five clinical centers in North America and to evaluate methods of quality assurance and feedback. Design Throughout a period of 18 months, the performance of sonographers in measuring fetal nuchal translucency was monitored using qualitative and quantitative methods of review. After 12 months, different approaches (written and personal feedback) were used to inform sonographers of technical aspects that needed to or could be improved. Results On initial qualitative review, discrepancies in judgment from different reviewers coincided with suboptimal magnification, failure to visualize the amniotic membrane and/or use of cross-shaped calipers. At subsequent global review, 13 (29%) images of nuchal translucency measurements were considered unacceptable. Quantitative assessment revealed that, during the first part of the study, the means from four sonographers were significantly smaller and the mean from the fifth sonographer was significantly larger than expected on the basis of findings from The Fetal Medicine Foundation (P < 0.0001). Following feedback, sonographers who underestimated nuchal translucency and who received a written report only did not change measurements overall ( P = 0.9759). In contrast, those who received additional intervention showed a marked difference ( P < 0.0001). Conclusions Global qualitative review of images from one sonographer may be preferable to assessment of individual aspects of images. Results from global qualitative review correspond well with findings from quantitative analysis, indicating that the latter can be applied for ongoing audit. Observation of divergent results should prompt extensive personal feedback, rather than a written report, to prevent sonographers from settling in their own, inappropriate technique.