Dual-Beam Ultrasound versus Transit-Time Flow Meter for Intraoperative Graft Flow Measurement during Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting
| Autor: | Oz M. Shapira, Curtis T. Hunter, Harold L. Lazar, Elad Anter, Benjamin R. Eskenazi, Richard J. Shemin, Amit Korach |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2006 |
| Předmět: |
Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
medicine.medical_specialty Graft flow Bypass grafting business.industry Ultrasound Transit time General Medicine 030204 cardiovascular system & hematology Flow measurement Dual beam 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine medicine.anatomical_structure 030228 respiratory system Internal medicine Cardiology Medicine Surgery In patient Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine business Artery |
| Zdroj: | Innovations: Technology and Techniques in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery. 1:131-136 |
| ISSN: | 1559-0879 1556-9845 |
| Popis: | Objective Assessment of graft flow during coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is increasingly practiced as a quality measure, particularly in patients undergoing minimally invasive or “off-pump” revascularization. Transit-time flow meters such as Transonic system (TS) are currently the most frequently used technology. The QuantixOR flow probe (QOR) is a novel technology comprised of dual-beam ultrasound transducer and a digital pulse-wave Doppler, allowing immediate, quantitative blood flow measurements. Excellent correlation between QOR and TS was observed in phantom and animal models. This study evaluated the QOR in patients undergoing CABG. Methods Graft flow was measured in 75 patients undergoing CABG (203 grafts). Intraobserver (n = 169) and interobserver (n = 33) variability was assessed and the QOR was compared with the TS (n = 155). Results An average of 2 probe sizes per case and “skeletonization” of a short segment of the vessel were required to measure flow in arterial conduits using TS. In contrast, measurements of flow with the QOR were achieved using a single probe without special vessel preparation for all types of conduits. Average intraobserver and interobserver variability using the QOR were 5 ± 41% and 4 ± 40%, respectively. Correlation was observed between 2 sets of measurements by the same observer (R2 = 0.746, P < 0.0001) and between 2 different observers (R2 = 0.667, P < 0.0001). Correlation was also observed between the QOR and TS (R2 = 0.542, P < 0.0001) with a variance of 12 ± 21%. Conclusions The QOR technology provides a reliable quantitative graft flow assessment that is simpler to obtain compared with TS. Correlation between the QOR and TS is excellent. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|