The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2026
Comparison of image quality in healthy dogs across 3 handheld ultrasound devices: Butterfly IQ+, Clarius C7HD3VET, and VScan Air.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Takahashi Yosuke, Kato Daiki, Maeda Shingo, Motegi Tomoki, Fujita Atsushi, Hashimoto Yuko, Nakagawa Takayuki, Nishimura Ryohei
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE ANIMALS AND PROCEDURE: Handheld ultrasound devices (HUDs), a cost-effective alternative to cart-based ultrasound in humans, are not well studied in veterinary medicine. Twelve healthy dogs underwent point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) examinations [abdomen, pleural space and lung (PLUS), cardiovascular] using 3 HUDs. Twelve views were recorded (6 abdominal, 2 PLUS, and 4 cardiovascular) and retrospectively assessed by 2 expert reviewers (1 for thoracic and 1 for abdominal) who were blinded to the HUD used. Reviewers assessed overall image quality (Likert scale) and ability to answer clinically relevant POCUS binary choice questions.
RESULTS: Image quality varied among HUDs for lung sliding (P = 0.001), curtain signs (P = 0.032), cardiac subxiphoid (P = 0.002), stomach (P < 0.001), short- and long-axis kidney views, gallbladder (P = 0.003), and caudal vena cava (P = 0.002). There were no differences among devices in answering key POCUS questions: subxiphoid heart (P = 0.332), stomach (P = 0.294), short-axis kidney (P = 0.308), caudal vena cava (P = 0.037 for group comparison; IQ versus VScan: P = 0.214, IQ versus Clarius: P = 0.03, VScan versus Clarius: P = 0.584), 4-chamber heart (P = 0.092), 5-chamber heart, long-axis kidney, mushroom, gallbladder, PLUS, and left atrium to aortic ratio (P > 0.999).
CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results of the current study suggest that, although image quality varied among HUDs, all 3 HUDs answered key abdominal, PLUS, and cardiac POCUS questions.
RESULTS: Image quality varied among HUDs for lung sliding (P = 0.001), curtain signs (P = 0.032), cardiac subxiphoid (P = 0.002), stomach (P < 0.001), short- and long-axis kidney views, gallbladder (P = 0.003), and caudal vena cava (P = 0.002). There were no differences among devices in answering key POCUS questions: subxiphoid heart (P = 0.332), stomach (P = 0.294), short-axis kidney (P = 0.308), caudal vena cava (P = 0.037 for group comparison; IQ versus VScan: P = 0.214, IQ versus Clarius: P = 0.03, VScan versus Clarius: P = 0.584), 4-chamber heart (P = 0.092), 5-chamber heart, long-axis kidney, mushroom, gallbladder, PLUS, and left atrium to aortic ratio (P > 0.999).
CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results of the current study suggest that, although image quality varied among HUDs, all 3 HUDs answered key abdominal, PLUS, and cardiac POCUS questions.