Michelle A Anderson1, James M Scheiman. 1. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Endoscopic Ultrasound Program, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An electronic radial array echoendoscope has been developed that uses the same US processor as the linear array instruments made by the same company, thereby eliminating the need for two processors. The performance of this prototype instrument was compared with that of a mechanical radial echoendoscope in patients. METHODS:Fourteen patients underwent sequential examinations with both echoendoscopes in random order. Predefined criteria were used to evaluate the performance of each instrument. RESULTS: The quality of the electronic radial image was rated as "good" or "superior" to that of the mechanical radial echoendoscope in 12 patients. In 2 patients, imaging with the prototype was inferior because of positioning and/or operator inexperience. The forward-viewing optics of the prototype enhanced intubation and instrument advancement. Limitations included excessive stiffness of the tip of the instrument that resulted in occasional slippage from the duodenum. The prototype provided an adequate diagnosis in 12 patients and was superior to the mechanical radial endoscope in terms of diagnosis in 2 cases. CONCLUSION: The prototype electronic radial echoendoscope provides US images of similar quality and is equivalent in terms of clinical utility to the mechanical radial echoendoscope.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: An electronic radial array echoendoscope has been developed that uses the same US processor as the linear array instruments made by the same company, thereby eliminating the need for two processors. The performance of this prototype instrument was compared with that of a mechanical radial echoendoscope in patients. METHODS: Fourteen patients underwent sequential examinations with both echoendoscopes in random order. Predefined criteria were used to evaluate the performance of each instrument. RESULTS: The quality of the electronic radial image was rated as "good" or "superior" to that of the mechanical radial echoendoscope in 12 patients. In 2 patients, imaging with the prototype was inferior because of positioning and/or operator inexperience. The forward-viewing optics of the prototype enhanced intubation and instrument advancement. Limitations included excessive stiffness of the tip of the instrument that resulted in occasional slippage from the duodenum. The prototype provided an adequate diagnosis in 12 patients and was superior to the mechanical radial endoscope in terms of diagnosis in 2 cases. CONCLUSION: The prototype electronic radial echoendoscope provides US images of similar quality and is equivalent in terms of clinical utility to the mechanical radial echoendoscope.
Authors: Christoph F Dietrich; Paolo Giorgio Arcidiacono; Barbara Braden; Sean Burmeister; Silvia Carrara; Xinwu Cui; Milena Di Leo; Yi Dong; Pietro Fusaroli; Uwe Gottschalk; Andrew J Healey; Michael Hocke; Stephan Hollerbach; Julio Iglesias Garcia; André Ignee; Christian Jürgensen; Michel Kahaleh; Masayuki Kitano; Rastislav Kunda; Alberto Larghi; Kathleen Möller; Bertrand Napoleon; Kofi W Oppong; Maria Chiara Petrone; Adrian Saftoiu; Rajesh Puri; Anand V Sahai; Erwin Santo; Malay Sharma; Assaad Soweid; Siyu Sun; Anthony Yuen Bun Teoh; Peter Vilmann; Hans Seifert; Christian Jenssen Journal: Endosc Ultrasound Date: 2019 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 5.628