Coppel, J;
Bountziouka, V;
Martin, D;
Gilbert-Kawai, E;
(2020)
A comparison of the quality of image acquisition between two different sidestream dark field video-microscopes.
Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing
10.1007/s10877-020-00514-x.
Preview |
Text
Coppel2020_Article_AComparisonOfTheQualityOfImage.pdf - Published Version Download (1MB) | Preview |
Abstract
Sidestream dark field (SDF) imaging enables direct visualisation of the microvasculature from which quantification of key variables is possible. The new MicroScan USB3 (MS-U) video-microscope is a hand-held SDF device that has undergone significant technical upgrades from its predecessor, the MicroScan Analogue (MS-A). The MS-U claims superior quality of sublingual microcirculatory image acquisition over the MS-A, however, this has yet to be robustly confirmed. In this manuscript, we therefore compare the quality of image acquisition between these two devices. The microcirculation of healthy volunteers was visualised to generate thirty video images for each device. Two independent raters, blinded to the device type, graded the quality of the images according to the six different traits in the Microcirculation Image Quality Score (MIQS) system. Chi-squared tests and Kappa statistics were used to compare not only the distribution of scores between the devices, but also agreement between raters. MS-U showed superior image quality over MS-A in three of out six MIQS traits; MS-U had significantly more optimal images by illumination (MS-U 95% optimal images, MS-A 70% optimal images (p-value 0.003)), by focus (MS-U 70% optimal images, MS-A 35% optimal images (p-value 0.002)) and by pressure (MS-U 72.5% optimal images, MS-A 47.5% optimal images (p-value 0.02)). For each trait, there was at least 85% agreement between the raters, and all the scores for each trait were independent of the rater (all p-values > 0.05). These results show that the new MS-U provides a superior quality of sublingual microcirculatory image acquisition when compared to old MS-A
| Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Title: | A comparison of the quality of image acquisition between two different sidestream dark field video-microscopes |
| Open access status: | An open access version is available from UCL Discovery |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s10877-020-00514-x |
| Publisher version: | https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-020-00514-x |
| Language: | English |
| Additional information: | This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
| Keywords: | Science & Technology, Life Sciences & Biomedicine, Anesthesiology, Microcirculation, Microscopy, Validation, Capillary, SUBLINGUAL MICROCIRCULATION |
| UCL classification: | UCL UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Population Health Sciences UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Population Health Sciences > UCL GOS Institute of Child Health UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Population Health Sciences > UCL GOS Institute of Child Health > Infection, Immunity and Inflammation Dept UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Population Health Sciences > UCL GOS Institute of Child Health > Population, Policy and Practice Dept |
| URI: | https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10114777 |
Archive Staff Only
 |
View Item |
