Image quality of intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) tends to get worse during long hours of operations. An orogastric tube (OGT) is often inserted in the beginning of the case, and left there for intermittent suction as needed, or removed before TEE exam to prevent echoic artifacts. However, if left there, the effect of suction might be limited due to unreliable tip position of the OG tube. If removed, stomach will be distended again. We devised the OG tube attached TEE for practical suction and assessed its effect on image quality intraoperatively.
OGT attached TEE probe is used for cardiac and liver transplantation cases. Each case is assigned 3 investigators who are blinded to this study design, We do image quality assessment by two methods; firstly, we categorize image quality as numbers based on each investigator's impression (1: Very bad, 2: bad, 3: acceptable, 4: good, 5: very good) and compare the difference in number before and after suctioning. Secondly, we evaluate consistency intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for inter-observer variability using investigator A, B and C. We evaluate absolute-agreement ICC for intra-observer variability using investigator C, who perform analysis for all images twice with a 6 to 8 months interval. This analysis was performed with left ventricular fraction area change using transgastric left ventricular short axis view.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Purpose
DIAGNOSTIC
Masking
TRIPLE
Enrollment
47
Suction orogastric tube which is attached to TEE probe
HFHS
Detroit, Michigan, United States
Image Quality Assessment Method#1: Difference in Likert Scale Before and After Suctioning
Difference in image quality assessment by Likert scale before/after suctioning, by assessing quality of images stored before/after suctioning. Investigators categorized the quality of all acquired images on a numeric scale (the higher number means higher image quality) based on each investigator's impression (1: very poor, 2: poor, 3: acceptable, 4: good, and 5: very good). Image quality improvement was determined by increased number. Three investigators (A, B, C) assessed the quality of all TEE image sets (i.e. before and after suctioning) post hoc. The acquired numeric scales were combined, and compared before and after suctioning, and calculated how much percentage of patients had improved image quality (i.e. increase in numeric scale), same quality (i.e. same numeric scale), and worsened image quality (i.e. decrease in numeric scale)
Time frame: TEE image sets were acquired after general anesthesia induction (before suction) and after 10minutes (after suction), and the outcome was the difference in image quality. In 6-8 months, investigator C did the same analysis on the same images in one day.
Reproducibility of the Left Ventricular Fraction Area Change (LV FAC) (Inter-observer)
The reproducibility of the LV FAC was assessed, assuming that better image quality would yield better LV FAC reproducibility. Three investigators (A, B, and C) assessed the quality of tall TEE image sets (i.e. before and after suction) post oc. These image sets were combined, and assessment was done for each group (i.e. before and after suctioning)
Time frame: Images are acquired after general anesthesia induction (before suctioning) and after 10min (after suctioning)
Reproducibility of the Left Ventricular Fraction Area Change (LV FAC) (Intra-observer)
Investigator C assess all the image sets in one day again after 6-8 months to determine if there is intra-observer variability with the initial assessment of image quality, All investigators are blinded to which images are obtained before or after suction
Time frame: 6-8 months after initial images obtained during surgery
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.