Automatic embolus detection compared with human experts - A Doppler ultrasound study

被引:41
|
作者
VanZuilen, EV
Mess, WH
Jensen, C
VanDerTweel, I
VanGijn, J
Ackerstaff, RGA
机构
[1] UNIV UTRECHT,CTR BIOSTAT,UTRECHT,NETHERLANDS
[2] UNIV UTRECHT HOSP,DEPT NEUROL,UTRECHT,NETHERLANDS
关键词
cerebral embolism; diagnosis; observer variation; ultrasonics;
D O I
10.1161/01.STR.27.10.1840
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and Purpose Transcranial Doppler ultrasound (TCD) reliably detects the occurrence of microembolic signals (MES). Unfortunately, TCD monitoring is a time-consuming and mentally strenuous procedure. The purpose of this study was to assess whether automatic embolus detection software devices acting as a ''stand-alone system'' are able to identify MES in patients with solid cerebral microemboli. Methods Ten records of TCD monitoring of the middle cerebral artery in patients with symptomatic high-grade carotid artery stenosis were analyzed for the moments at which MES occurred by four observers and three automatic detection software devices (RB11 on TC2000, Pioneer Version 2.10, and Embotec). The results of the three software systems were assessed on the basic assumption that MES were present if at least three of the four observers agreed. Results The average number of 1-second periods in which MES were detected by the four observers per tape ranged from 5 to 39. The overall kappa values (and SEs) for chance-corrected interobserver agreement between the four observers ranged from .94 (.02) to .99 (.01). The agreement between the software devices and the observers was lower, with kappa values (and SEs) ranging from .18 (.17) to .93 (.07). The RB11 and Embotec systems achieved a kappa value higher than 0.4 in all tapes. The Pioneer system failed to reach a kappa value of 0.4 in three tapes. The RB11 showed a sensitivity of 70% for detecting MES, the Embotec 62%, and the Pioneer 44%. Conclusions In patients with symptomatic high-grade carotid artery stenosis, a high degree of agreement in the detection of moments of MES can be achieved between observers. The three automatic detection software devices reached less agreement. Supervision of TCD monitoring and assessment of MES by an experienced observer is still necessary.
引用
收藏
页码:1840 / 1843
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Automatic online embolus detection and artifact rejection with the first multifrequency transcranial Doppler
    Brucher, R
    Russell, D
    STROKE, 2002, 33 (08) : 1969 - 1974
  • [2] DETECTION OF AIR EMBOLUS BY DOPPLER ULTRASONICS
    EDMONDSSEAL, J
    MAROON, JC
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF MEDICINE-LONDON, 1969, 62 (10): : 1022 - +
  • [3] Transcranial Doppler Embolus Detection: A Primer
    Chung, Emma M. L.
    ULTRASOUND, 2006, 14 (04) : 202 - 210
  • [4] Automatic embolus detection by a neural network
    Kemény, V
    Droste, DW
    Hermes, S
    Nabavi, DG
    Schulte-Altedorneburg, G
    Siebler, M
    Ringelstein, EB
    STROKE, 1999, 30 (04) : 807 - 810
  • [5] Doppler ultrasound dataset for the development of automatic emboli detection algorithms
    Pierleoni, Paola
    Mercuri, Marco
    Belli, Alberto
    Pieri, Massimo
    Marroni, Alessandro
    Palma, Lorenzo
    DATA IN BRIEF, 2019, 27
  • [6] Embolus detection and differentiation using multifrequency transcranial Doppler
    Russell, D
    Brucher, R
    STROKE, 2006, 37 (02) : 340 - 341
  • [7] Automatic detection of bubbles in the subclavian vein using Doppler ultrasound signals
    Tufan, Kadir
    Ademoglu, Ahmet
    Kurtaran, Emre
    Yildiz, Gokcen
    Aydin, Salih
    Egi, Salih M.
    AVIATION SPACE AND ENVIRONMENTAL MEDICINE, 2006, 77 (09): : 957 - 962
  • [8] EMBOLUS DETECTION EFFICIENCY - PULSED VS CW DOPPLER
    STUMP, DA
    DEAL, DD
    OKASINSKI, N
    STROKE, 1995, 26 (04) : 726 - 726
  • [9] Embolus detection and differentiation using multifrequency transcranial Doppler
    Russell, D
    Brucher, R
    STROKE, 2005, 36 (04) : 706 - 706
  • [10] Embolus detection and differentiation using multifrequency transcranial Doppler - Response
    Markus, HS
    Punter, M
    STROKE, 2006, 37 (02) : 341 - 342