ArticleJournal of ultrasonography2024
Advantages of Ultrafast™ ultrasound in the screening for renal artery disease.
Article in Journal of ultrasonography, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: Renal artery disease is the most common cause of secondary hypertension worldwide. B-mode and Doppler ultrasound are considered the modalities of choice for the imaging of the renal arteries. However, an adequate examination can be plagued by difficulties in patients with unfavorable anatomy. UltraFast™ ultrasound is faster, performed with higher frame rates, and enables prospective and retrospective data analysis with quantification of flow data in the obtained image, so it may be able to resolve some of the difficulties encountered during conventional ultrasound examinations in patients with suspected renal artery disease. Material and methods: Comparison of the duration of conventional and UltraFast™ Doppler examinations of segmental renal arteries was performed on 52 young, healthy volunteers. Duration times were summarized using the median and interquartile range, and comparisons between the two methods were performed using the Wilcoxon test for paired samples. Results: The duration of UltraFast™ ultrasound examinations was significantly shorter in comparison to conventional ultrasound for both kidneys and in total ( Conclusions: The study provides evidence that UltraFast™ ultrasound is faster than conventional Doppler ultrasonography for the assessment of renal artery disease in healthy adults without a history of renal disease. The findings have important implications for clinical practice, as they suggest that UltraFast
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.