Echocardiographic imaging of technically difficult patients in the intensive care unit: Use of optison in combination with fundamental and harmonic imaging

George K. Daniel, Mohit K. Chawla, Stephen Sawada, Irmina Gradus-Pizlo, Harvey Feigenbaum, Douglas S. Segar

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

22 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Previous studies of intravenous contrast agents have excluded patients in the intensive care unit. These patients remain among the most technically difficult to image with ultrasound. We studied the effect of different imaging modalities with and without intravenous contrast (Optison) on endocardial border visualization during echocardiography. Fifty patients in the intensive care unit (32 men, 24 on mechanical ventilator, 10 with chest bandages; mean age, 59 years; mean weight, 91.7 kg; mean height, 67.6 inches) were considered to have technically difficult images when the endocardium could not be visualized in at least 2 of the 6 segments in either apical view. Each patient was studied with the use of fundamental (F), harmonic (H), fundamental + Optison (F + O), and H + O techniques, with standard long-axis, short-axis, and apical 4- and 2-chamber views. Intravenous Optison (0.5 to 1.5 mL) was given before F + O and H + O imaging. There were no contrast-related side effects noted. All images were stored digitally in a quad-screen format. For each set of images, segments (n = 22) were given an endocardial border visualization score of 0 if not visualized, I if visualized in either systole or diastole, and 2 if visualized in both. There was stepwise improvement in endocardial border visualization, with mean endocardial border visualization score of 1.09 ± 0.83 (F), 1.33 ± 0.81 (H), 1.64 ± 0.62 (F + O), and 1.90 ± 0.35 (H + O). There was a statistically significant difference between each group (P < .001). The incremental benefit of Optison was greater with harmonic imaging than with fundamental (P < .001). The use of Optison is safe and effective in the intensive care unit. In combination with harmonic imaging, contrast provides maximal endocardial border delineation during echocardiographic imaging of technically difficult patients in the intensive care unit.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)917-920
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of the American Society of Echocardiography
Volume14
Issue number9
StatePublished - 2001

Fingerprint

Intensive Care Units
Endocardium
Diastole
Systole
Mechanical Ventilators
Bandages
FS 069
Contrast Media
Echocardiography
Thorax
Weights and Measures

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Echocardiographic imaging of technically difficult patients in the intensive care unit : Use of optison in combination with fundamental and harmonic imaging. / Daniel, George K.; Chawla, Mohit K.; Sawada, Stephen; Gradus-Pizlo, Irmina; Feigenbaum, Harvey; Segar, Douglas S.

In: Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography, Vol. 14, No. 9, 2001, p. 917-920.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{1649039546de42a8a608d8885ce04502,
title = "Echocardiographic imaging of technically difficult patients in the intensive care unit: Use of optison in combination with fundamental and harmonic imaging",
abstract = "Previous studies of intravenous contrast agents have excluded patients in the intensive care unit. These patients remain among the most technically difficult to image with ultrasound. We studied the effect of different imaging modalities with and without intravenous contrast (Optison) on endocardial border visualization during echocardiography. Fifty patients in the intensive care unit (32 men, 24 on mechanical ventilator, 10 with chest bandages; mean age, 59 years; mean weight, 91.7 kg; mean height, 67.6 inches) were considered to have technically difficult images when the endocardium could not be visualized in at least 2 of the 6 segments in either apical view. Each patient was studied with the use of fundamental (F), harmonic (H), fundamental + Optison (F + O), and H + O techniques, with standard long-axis, short-axis, and apical 4- and 2-chamber views. Intravenous Optison (0.5 to 1.5 mL) was given before F + O and H + O imaging. There were no contrast-related side effects noted. All images were stored digitally in a quad-screen format. For each set of images, segments (n = 22) were given an endocardial border visualization score of 0 if not visualized, I if visualized in either systole or diastole, and 2 if visualized in both. There was stepwise improvement in endocardial border visualization, with mean endocardial border visualization score of 1.09 ± 0.83 (F), 1.33 ± 0.81 (H), 1.64 ± 0.62 (F + O), and 1.90 ± 0.35 (H + O). There was a statistically significant difference between each group (P < .001). The incremental benefit of Optison was greater with harmonic imaging than with fundamental (P < .001). The use of Optison is safe and effective in the intensive care unit. In combination with harmonic imaging, contrast provides maximal endocardial border delineation during echocardiographic imaging of technically difficult patients in the intensive care unit.",
author = "Daniel, {George K.} and Chawla, {Mohit K.} and Stephen Sawada and Irmina Gradus-Pizlo and Harvey Feigenbaum and Segar, {Douglas S.}",
year = "2001",
language = "English",
volume = "14",
pages = "917--920",
journal = "Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography",
issn = "0894-7317",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Echocardiographic imaging of technically difficult patients in the intensive care unit

T2 - Use of optison in combination with fundamental and harmonic imaging

AU - Daniel, George K.

AU - Chawla, Mohit K.

AU - Sawada, Stephen

AU - Gradus-Pizlo, Irmina

AU - Feigenbaum, Harvey

AU - Segar, Douglas S.

PY - 2001

Y1 - 2001

N2 - Previous studies of intravenous contrast agents have excluded patients in the intensive care unit. These patients remain among the most technically difficult to image with ultrasound. We studied the effect of different imaging modalities with and without intravenous contrast (Optison) on endocardial border visualization during echocardiography. Fifty patients in the intensive care unit (32 men, 24 on mechanical ventilator, 10 with chest bandages; mean age, 59 years; mean weight, 91.7 kg; mean height, 67.6 inches) were considered to have technically difficult images when the endocardium could not be visualized in at least 2 of the 6 segments in either apical view. Each patient was studied with the use of fundamental (F), harmonic (H), fundamental + Optison (F + O), and H + O techniques, with standard long-axis, short-axis, and apical 4- and 2-chamber views. Intravenous Optison (0.5 to 1.5 mL) was given before F + O and H + O imaging. There were no contrast-related side effects noted. All images were stored digitally in a quad-screen format. For each set of images, segments (n = 22) were given an endocardial border visualization score of 0 if not visualized, I if visualized in either systole or diastole, and 2 if visualized in both. There was stepwise improvement in endocardial border visualization, with mean endocardial border visualization score of 1.09 ± 0.83 (F), 1.33 ± 0.81 (H), 1.64 ± 0.62 (F + O), and 1.90 ± 0.35 (H + O). There was a statistically significant difference between each group (P < .001). The incremental benefit of Optison was greater with harmonic imaging than with fundamental (P < .001). The use of Optison is safe and effective in the intensive care unit. In combination with harmonic imaging, contrast provides maximal endocardial border delineation during echocardiographic imaging of technically difficult patients in the intensive care unit.

AB - Previous studies of intravenous contrast agents have excluded patients in the intensive care unit. These patients remain among the most technically difficult to image with ultrasound. We studied the effect of different imaging modalities with and without intravenous contrast (Optison) on endocardial border visualization during echocardiography. Fifty patients in the intensive care unit (32 men, 24 on mechanical ventilator, 10 with chest bandages; mean age, 59 years; mean weight, 91.7 kg; mean height, 67.6 inches) were considered to have technically difficult images when the endocardium could not be visualized in at least 2 of the 6 segments in either apical view. Each patient was studied with the use of fundamental (F), harmonic (H), fundamental + Optison (F + O), and H + O techniques, with standard long-axis, short-axis, and apical 4- and 2-chamber views. Intravenous Optison (0.5 to 1.5 mL) was given before F + O and H + O imaging. There were no contrast-related side effects noted. All images were stored digitally in a quad-screen format. For each set of images, segments (n = 22) were given an endocardial border visualization score of 0 if not visualized, I if visualized in either systole or diastole, and 2 if visualized in both. There was stepwise improvement in endocardial border visualization, with mean endocardial border visualization score of 1.09 ± 0.83 (F), 1.33 ± 0.81 (H), 1.64 ± 0.62 (F + O), and 1.90 ± 0.35 (H + O). There was a statistically significant difference between each group (P < .001). The incremental benefit of Optison was greater with harmonic imaging than with fundamental (P < .001). The use of Optison is safe and effective in the intensive care unit. In combination with harmonic imaging, contrast provides maximal endocardial border delineation during echocardiographic imaging of technically difficult patients in the intensive care unit.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0035176851&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0035176851&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 11547278

AN - SCOPUS:0035176851

VL - 14

SP - 917

EP - 920

JO - Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography

JF - Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography

SN - 0894-7317

IS - 9

ER -