Hand-carried ultrasound performed at bedside in cardiology inpatient setting – a comparative study with comprehensive echocardiography

BACKGROUND: Hand-carried ultrasound (HCU) devices have been demonstrated to improve the diagnosis of cardiac diseases over physical examination, and have the potential to broaden the versatility in ultrasound application. The role of these devices in the assessment of hospitalized patients is not completely established. In this study we sought to perform a direct comparison between bedside evaluation using HCU and comprehensive echocardiography (CE), in cardiology inpatient setting. METHODS: We studied 44 consecutive patients (mean age 54 ± 18 years, 25 men) who underwent bedside echocardiography using HCU and CE. HCU was performed by a cardiologist with level-2 training in the performance and interpretation of echocardiography, using two-dimensional imaging, color Doppler, and simple calliper measurements. CE was performed by an experienced echocardiographer (level-3 training) and considered as the gold standard. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in cardiac chamber dimensions and left ventricular ejection fraction determined by the two techniques. The agreement between HCU and CE for the detection of segmental wall motion abnormalities was 83% (Kappa = 0.58). There was good agreement for detecting significant mitral valve regurgitation (Kappa = 0.85), aortic regurgitation (kappa = 0.89), and tricuspid regurgitation (Kappa = 0.74). A complete evaluation of patients with stenotic and prosthetic dysfunctional valves, as well as pulmonary hypertension, was not possible using HCU due to its technical limitations in determining hemodynamic parameters. CONCLUSION: Bedside evaluation using HCU is helpful for assessing cardiac chamber dimensions, left ventricular global and segmental function, and significant valvular regurgitation. However, it has limitations regarding hemodynamic assessment, an important issue in the cardiology inpatient setting

Hand-carried ultrasound performed at bedside in cardiology inpatient setting – a comparative study with comprehensive echocardiography

Abstract Background Hand-carried ultrasound (HCU) devices have been demonstrated to improve the diagnosis of cardiac diseases over physical examination, and have the potential to broaden the versatility in ultrasound application. The role of these devices in the assessment of hospitalized patients is not completely established. In this study we sought to perform a direct comparison between bedside evaluation using HCU and comprehensive echocardiography (CE), in cardiology inpatient setting. Methods We studied 44 consecutive patients (mean age 54 ± 18 years, 25 men) who underwent bedside echocardiography using HCU and CE. HCU was performed by a cardiologist with level-2 training in the performance and interpretation of echocardiography, using two-dimensional imaging, color Doppler, and simple calliper measurements. CE was performed by an experienced echocardiographer (level-3 training) and considered as the gold standard. Results There were no significant differences in cardiac chamber dimensions and left ventricular ejection fraction determined by the two techniques. The agreement between HCU and CE for the detection of segmental wall motion abnormalities was 83% (Kappa = 0.58). There was good agreement for detecting significant mitral valve regurgitation (Kappa = 0.85), aortic regurgitation (kappa = 0.89), and tricuspid regurgitation (Kappa = 0.74). A complete evaluation of patients with stenotic and prosthetic dysfunctional valves, as well as pulmonary hypertension, was not possible using HCU due to its technical limitations in determining hemodynamic parameters. Conclusion Bedside evaluation using HCU is helpful for assessing cardiac chamber dimensions, left ventricular global and segmental function, and significant valvular regurgitation. However, it has limitations regarding hemodynamic assessment, an important issue in the cardiology inpatient setting.</p

Case-fatality from orally-transmitted acute Chagas disease: a systematic review and metanalysis

Federal University of Acre. Rio Branco, AC, Brazil.Federal University of Parana. Curitiba, PR, Brazil.Elson S. Floyd College of Medicine. Lumni Tribal Health Center. Spokane, WA, Estados Unidos.University of Pernambuco. Recife, PE, Brazil.University of Amazonas. Manaus, AM, Brazil.University of Tocantins. Palmas, TO, Brazil.Federal University of Acre. Rio Branco, AC, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Instituto Evandro Chagas. Ananindeua, PA, Brasil.Federal University of Pará. Medical School. Belém, PA, Brazil.Secretary of Health of the State of Acre. Rio Branco, AC, Brazil.Federal University of Maranhão. Sao Luis, MA, Brazil.Federal University of Ceará. Fortaleza, CE, Brazil.Harvard Medical School. Brigham and Women’s Hospital. Division of Infectious Disease. Boston, USA.Federal University of Acre. Rio Branco, AC, Brazil.Orally-transmitted acute Chagas disease (CD) is emerging as an important public health problem. The prognosis of acute infection following oral transmission is unknown. The aim of this paper was to analyze and summarize data on orally-transmitted acute CD. We searched for studies from 1968 to January 31, 2018. We included studies and unpublished data from government sources that reported patients with acute CD orally-transmitted. We identified 41 papers and we added 932 unpublished cases. In all, our study covered 2470 cases and occurrence of 97 deaths. Our meta-analysis estimated that the case-fatality rate was 1.0% (95% CI 0.0 – 4.0%). Lethality rates have been declined over time (p = 0.02). In conclusion, orally-transmitted acute CD has considerable lethality in the first year after infection. The lethality in symptomatic cases is similar to that from other routes of infection. The lethality rate of orally-acquired disease have declined over the years