Observational studyJournal of perinatal medicine2023
Fetal intelligent navigation echocardiography (FINE) has superior performance compared to manual navigation of the fetal heart by non-expert sonologists.
Observational study in Journal of perinatal medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence in Fetal and Pediatric Echocardiography.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Bovine aortic arch: a potential indicator that may not serve in prenatal diagnosis - a study based on fetal anatomy, genetics, and postnatal clinical outcomes.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Semi-Automatic Measurement of Fetal Cardiac Axis in Fetuses with Congenital Heart Disease (CHD) with Fetal Intelligent Navigation Echocardiography (FINE).Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesManual and intelligent navigation (i.e. fetal intelligent navigation echocardiography or FINE) by the operator are two methods to obtain standard fetal cardiac views from spatiotemporal image correlation (STIC) volumes. The objective was to compare the performance between manual and intelligent navigation (FINE) of the fetal heart by non-expert sonologists.
methodsIn this prospective observational study, ten sonologists underwent formal training on both navigational methods. Subsequently, they were tested on their ability to obtain nine cardiac views from five STIC volumes of normal fetal hearts (19-28 gestational weeks) using such methods. The following parameters were determined for both methods: (1) success rate of obtaining nine cardiac views; (2) mean time to obtain nine cardiac views per sonologist; and (3) maximum number of cardiac views successfully obtained for each STIC volume.
resultsAll fetal cardiac images obtained from 100 STIC volumes (50 for each navigational method) were reviewed by an expert in fetal echocardiography. Compared to manual navigation, FINE was associated with a significantly: (1) higher success rate of obtaining eight (excluding the abdomen view) appropriate cardiac views (92-100% vs. 56-88%; all p<0.05); (2) shorter mean time (minute:seconds) to obtain nine cardiac views (2:11 ± 0:37 vs. 15:49 ± 7:44; p<0.0001); and (3) higher success rate of obtaining all nine cardiac views for a given STIC volume (86 vs. 14%; p<0.001).
conclusionsWhen performed by non-expert sonologists, intelligent navigation (FINE) had a superior performance compared to manual navigation of the normal fetal heart. Specifically, FINE obtained appropriate fetal cardiac views in 92-100% of cases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.