Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading  Processing Request

2D versus 3D real time ultrasound with live xPlane imaging to visualize aortic and ductal arches: Comparison between methods

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
  • معلومة اضافية
    • Contributors:
      Dell'Oro, S; Verderio, M; Incerti, M; Mastrolia, S; Cozzolino, S; Vergani, P
    • بيانات النشر:
      PeerJ Inc.
      LONDON
    • الموضوع:
      2018
    • Collection:
      Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca: BOA (Bicocca Open Archive)
    • نبذة مختصرة :
      Background: The diagnosis of congenital heart defects is challenging, especially for what concerns conotruncal anomalies. Indeed, although the screening techniques of fetal cardiac anomalies have greatly improved, the detection rate of conotruncal anomalies still remains low due to the fact that they are associated with a normal four-chamber view. Therefore, the study aimed to compare real-time threedimensional echocardiography with live xPlane imaging with two-dimensional (2D) traditional imaging in visualizing ductal and aortic arches during routine echocardiography of the second trimester of gestation. Methods: This was an observational prospective study including 114 women with uncomplicated, singleton pregnancies. All sonographic studies were performed by two different operators, of them 60 by a first level operator, while 54 by a second level operator. A subanalysis was run in order to evaluate the feasibility and the time needed for the two procedures according to fetal spine position and operator's experience. Results: The measurements with 2D ultrasound were performed in all 114 echocardiographies, while live xPlane imaging was feasible in the 78% of the cases, and this was mainly due to fetal position. The time lapse needed to visualize aortic and ductal arches was significantly lower when using 2D ultrasound compared to live xPlane imaging (29.56 ± 28.5 s vs. 42.5 ± 38.1 s, P = 0.006 for aortic arch; 22.14 ± 17.8 s vs. 37.1 ± 33.8 s, P = 0.001 for ductal arch), also when performing a subanalysis according to operators' experience (P < 0.05 for all comparisons). Feasibility of live xPlane proved to be correlated with the position of the fetal spine and the operator's experience. Discussion: To find a reproducible and standardized method to detect fetal heart defects may bring a great benefit for both patients and operators. In this scenario live xPlane imaging is a novel method to visualize ductal and aortic arches. We found that the position of the fetal spine may affect the feasibility of the ...
    • Relation:
      info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/pmid/29637020; info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/wos/WOS:000429848600002; volume:2018; issue:4; journal:PEERJ; http://hdl.handle.net/10281/212702; info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/scopus/2-s2.0-85045060346; https://peerj.com/articles/4561.pdf
    • الرقم المعرف:
      10.7717/peerj.4561
    • Rights:
      info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
    • الرقم المعرف:
      edsbas.793AA566