Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

A urologic stethoscope? Urologist performed sonography using a pocket-size ultrasound device in the point-of-care setting

  • Urology - Original Paper
  • Published:
International Urology and Nephrology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Ultrasound is commonly used in urology. Technical advances with reduced size and cost led to diffusion of small ultrasound devices to many clinical settings. Even so, most ultrasound studies are performed by non-urologists. We aimed to evaluate the utility of a pocket-size ultrasound device (Vscan™ GE Healthcare) and the quality of urologist performed study.

Methods

Three consecutive studies were performed: (1) a urologist using the pocket ultrasound, (2) a sonographist using the pocket ultrasound, and (3) a sonographist using a standard ultrasound device. Thirty-six patients were evaluated with a basic urologic ultrasound study. An excepted deviation between studies was preset for numeric parameters and t test performed. Ordinal parameters were analyzed using Cohen’s kappa coefficient.

Results

Kidney length, renal pelvis length, renal cyst diameter, post-void residual and prostate volume (transabdominal) differences were found to be insignificant when comparing a urologist pocket ultrasound study to a sonographist standard ultrasound study (P = 0.15; P = 0.21; P = 0.81; P = 0.32; P = 0.07, respectively). Hydronpehrosis evaluation (none, mild, moderate and severe) and the presence of ureteral jet signs conferred a high inter-observer agreement when comparing the above studies using the Cohen’s kappa coefficient (K = 0.63; K = 0.62, respectively).

Conclusions

Urologist performed pocket ultrasound study is valid in evaluating the upper and lower urinary tract and is practical in many clinical scenarios. The urologic stethoscope is now becoming a reality within reach.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Donald I, Macvicar J, Brown TG (1958) Investigation of abdominal masses by pulsed ultrasound. Lancet (London, England) 1(7032):1188–1195

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Suda I (1966) Ultrasonic diagnosis in gynecology and obstetrics. Nihon Sanka Fujinka Gakkai Zasshi 18(10):1197–1206

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Mollenkopf M, Tait N (2013) Is it time to include point-of-care ultrasound in general surgery training? A review to stimulate discussion. ANZ J Surg 83(12):908–911

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kotagal M, Quiroga E, Ruffatto BJ, Adedipe AA, Backlund BH, Nathan R et al (2015) Impact of point-of-care ultrasound training on surgical residents’ confidence. J Surg Educ 72(4):e82–e87

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Leonard SA, Thomas R (1987) Diagnostic ultrasound in the urologist’s office. Urology 29(6):666–668

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Reisman EM, Kennedy TJ, Roehrborn CG, McConnell JD (1991) A prospective study of urologist-performed sonographic evaluation of the urinary tract in patients with prostatism. J Urol 145(6):1186–1189

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bodner DR, Witcher M, Resnick MI (1990) Application of office ultrasound in the management of the spinal cord injury patient. J Urol 143(5):969–972

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Acino S, Resnick MI (1988) Office urologic ultrasound. Urol Clin North Am 15(4):577–588

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Surange RS, Jeygopal NS, Chowdhury SD, Sharma NK (2001) Bedside ultrasound: a useful tool for the on-call urologist? Int Urol Nephrol 32(4):591–596

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Moslemi MK, Mahfoozi B (2011) Urologist-operated ultrasound and its use in urological outpatient clinics. Patient Prefer Adherence 5:85–88

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Ruddox V, Stokke TM, Edvardsen T, Hjelmesæth J, Aune E, Bækkevar M et al (2013) The diagnostic accuracy of pocket-size cardiac ultrasound performed by unselected residents with minimal training. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 29(8):1749–1757

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Troyano Luque JM, Ferrer-Roca O, Barco-Marcellán MJ, Sabatel López R, Pérez-Medina T, Pérez-Lopez FR (2013) Modification of the hand-held Vscan ultrasound and verification of its performance for transvaginal applications. Ultrasonics 53(1):17–22

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Coşkun F, Akıncı E, Ceyhan MA, Sahin Kavaklı H (2011) Our new stethoscope in the emergency department: handheld ultrasound. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg 17(6):488–492

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Dijos M, Pucheux Y, Lafitte M, Réant P, Prevot A, Mignot A et al (2012) Fast track echo of abdominal aortic aneurysm using a real pocket-ultrasound device at bedside. Echocardiography 29(3):285–290

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Wang Y, Lu Z, Hu J, Wang X, Lu J, Hao Y et al (2013) Renal access by sonographer versus urologist during percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Urol J 10(4):1035–1039

    Google Scholar 

  16. Barreiros AP, Cui XW, Ignee A, De Molo C, Pirri C, Dietrich CF (2014) EchoScopy in scanning abdominal diseases: initial clinical experience. Z Gastroenterol 52(3):269–275

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Stock KF, Klein B, Steubl D, Lersch C, Heemann U, Wagenpfeil S et al (2015) Comparison of a pocket-size ultrasound device with a premium ultrasound machine: diagnostic value and time required in bedside ultrasound examination. Abdom Imaging 40(7):2861–2866

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Daurat A, Choquet O, Bringuier S, Charbit J, Egan M, Capdevila X (2015) Diagnosis of postoperative urinary retention using a simplified ultrasound bladder measurement. Anesth Analg 120(5):1033–1038

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arnon Lavi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lavi, A., Tzemah, S., Hussein, A. et al. A urologic stethoscope? Urologist performed sonography using a pocket-size ultrasound device in the point-of-care setting. Int Urol Nephrol 49, 1513–1518 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-017-1641-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-017-1641-8

Keywords

Navigation