TEE Image QualityNCT03454399
Does Transesophageal Echocardiography Along With an Orogastric Tube Improve the Image Quality Intraoperatively?
A study testing Suction orogastric tube which is attached to TEE probe in people with TEE Image Quality, run by Henry Ford Health System at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Image quality of intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) tends to get worse during long hours of operations. An orogastric tube (OGT) is often inserted in the beginning of the case, and left there for intermittent suction as needed, or removed before TEE exam to prevent echoic artifacts. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- TEE Image Quality
- What is being tested?
- Suction orogastric tube which is attached to TEE probe
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 47 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 1 Feb 2017to 31 Dec 2017
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- adult cardiac surgery or liver transplant surgery
Who cannot join
- TEE with significant wall motion abnormality or TEE contraindicated patients
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Image quality of intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) tends to get worse during long hours of operations. An orogastric tube (OGT) is often inserted in the beginning of the case, and left there for intermittent suction as needed, or removed before TEE exam to prevent echoic artifacts. However, if left there, the effect of suction might be limited due to unreliable tip position of the OG tube. If removed, stomach will be distended again. We devised the OG tube attached TEE for practical suction and assessed its effect on image quality intraoperatively.
Read the detailed description
OGT attached TEE probe is used for cardiac and liver transplantation cases. Each case is assigned 3 investigators who are blinded to this study design, We do image quality assessment by two methods; firstly, we categorize image quality as numbers based on each investigator's impression (1: Very bad, 2: bad, 3: acceptable, 4: good, 5: very good) and compare the difference in number before and after suctioning. Secondly, we evaluate consistency intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for inter-observer variability using investigator A, B and C. We evaluate absolute-agreement ICC for intra-observer variability using investigator C, who perform analysis for all images twice with a 6 to 8 months interval. This analysis was performed with left ventricular fraction area change using transgastric left ventricular short axis view.
- Conditions
- TEE Image Quality
- Being tested
- Suction orogastric tube which is attached to TEE probe
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Suction orogastric tube which is attached to TEE probeProcedure or surgery
Suction orogastric tube which is attached to TEE probe
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| TEE image before suction | No intervention | Suction orogastric tube which is attached to TEE probe |
| TEE image after suction | Experimental | Suction orogastric tube which is attached to TEE probe Receives: Procedure: Suction orogastric tube which is attached to TEE probe |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Image Quality Assessment Method#1: Difference in Likert Scale Before and After Suctioning
Difference in image quality assessment by Likert scale before/after suctioning, by assessing quality of images stored before/after suctioning. Investigators categorized the quality of all acquired images on a numeric scale (the higher number means higher image quality) based on each investigator's impression (1: very poor, 2: poor, 3: acceptable, 4: good, and 5: very good). Image quality improvement was determined by increased number. Three investigators (A, B, C) assessed the quality of all TEE image sets (i.e. before and after suctioning) post hoc. The acquired numeric scales were combined, and compared before and after suctioning, and calculated how much percentage of patients had improved image quality (i.e. increase in numeric scale), same quality (i.e. same numeric scale), and worsened image quality (i.e. decrease in numeric scale)
Measured: TEE image sets were acquired after general anesthesia induction (before suction) and after 10minutes (after suction), and the outcome was the difference in image quality. In 6-8 months, investigator C did the same analysis on the same images in one day.
Secondary outcomes (2)
Reproducibility of the Left Ventricular Fraction Area Change (LV FAC) (Inter-observer)
The reproducibility of the LV FAC was assessed, assuming that better image quality would yield better LV FAC reproducibility. Three investigators (A, B, and C) assessed the quality of tall TEE image sets (i.e. before and after suction) post oc. These image sets were combined, and assessment was done for each group (i.e. before and after suctioning)
Measured: Images are acquired after general anesthesia induction (before suctioning) and after 10min (after suctioning)
Reproducibility of the Left Ventricular Fraction Area Change (LV FAC) (Intra-observer)
Investigator C assess all the image sets in one day again after 6-8 months to determine if there is intra-observer variability with the initial assessment of image quality, All investigators are blinded to which images are obtained before or after suction
Measured: 6-8 months after initial images obtained during surgery
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted5 Mar 2018
- Study start1 Feb 2017
- Primary completion31 Dec 2017
- Study completion31 Dec 2017
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Other trials for TEE Image QualityStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Henry Ford Health SystemThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Triple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Care provider, Investigator
- Enrolment
- 47 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Henry Ford Health System
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Yoshihisa Morita, Henry Ford Health System
- Investigators
- Donald Penning, MD, Study director, HFHS
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03454399
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 11078
- Status last verified
- Sep 2024
- First submitted
- 27 Feb 2018
- Last updated
- 23 Sep 2024
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 23 Sep 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Does Transesophageal Echocardiography Along With an Orogastric Tube Improve the Image Quality Intraoperatively?
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03454399
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 11078
- Conditions
- TEE Image Quality
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 47 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Henry Ford Health SystemUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Feb 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Dec 2017 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Dec 2017 (actual)
- First posted
- 5 Mar 2018 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 23 Sep 2024
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Image quality of intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) tends to get worse during long hours of operations. An orogastric tube (OGT) is often inserted in the beginning of the case, and left there for intermittent suction as needed, or removed before TEE exam to prevent echoic artifacts. However, if left there, the effect of suction might be limited due to unreliable tip position of the OG tube. If removed, stomach will be distended again. We devised the OG tube attached TEE for practical suction and assessed its effect on image quality intraoperatively.
Detailed description
OGT attached TEE probe is used for cardiac and liver transplantation cases. Each case is assigned 3 investigators who are blinded to this study design, We do image quality assessment by two methods; firstly, we categorize image quality as numbers based on each investigator's impression (1: Very bad, 2: bad, 3: acceptable, 4: good, 5: very good) and compare the difference in number before and after suctioning. Secondly, we evaluate consistency intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for inter-observer variability using investigator A, B and C. We evaluate absolute-agreement ICC for intra-observer variability using investigator C, who perform analysis for all images twice with a 6 to 8 months interval. This analysis was performed with left ventricular fraction area change using transgastric left ventricular short axis view.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Triple blind (participant, care provider, investigator)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| TEE image before suction | No intervention | –Suction orogastric tube which is attached to TEE probe |
| TEE image after suction | Experimental | Procedure: Suction orogastric tube which is attached to TEE probeSuction orogastric tube which is attached to TEE probe |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- adult cardiac surgery or liver transplant surgery
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- TEE with significant wall motion abnormality or TEE contraindicated patients
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Suction orogastric tube which is attached to TEE probeSuction orogastric tube which is attached to TEE probe | Procedure or surgery | TEE image after suction |
Primary outcome
Image Quality Assessment Method#1: Difference in Likert Scale Before and After Suctioning
Time frame: TEE image sets were acquired after general anesthesia induction (before suction) and after 10minutes (after suction), and the outcome was the difference in image quality. In 6-8 months, investigator C did the same analysis on the same images in one day.
Difference in image quality assessment by Likert scale before/after suctioning, by assessing quality of images stored before/after suctioning. Investigators categorized the quality of all acquired images on a numeric scale (the higher number means higher image quality) based on each investigator's impression (1: very poor, 2: poor, 3: acceptable, 4: good, and 5: very good). Image quality improvement was determined by increased number. Three investigators (A, B, C) assessed the quality of all TEE image sets (i.e. before and after suctioning) post hoc. The acquired numeric scales were combined, and compared before and after suctioning, and calculated how much percentage of patients had improved image quality (i.e. increase in numeric scale), same quality (i.e. same numeric scale), and worsened image quality (i.e. decrease in numeric scale)
2 secondary outcomes
Reproducibility of the Left Ventricular Fraction Area Change (LV FAC) (Inter-observer)
Time frame: Images are acquired after general anesthesia induction (before suctioning) and after 10min (after suctioning)
Reproducibility of the Left Ventricular Fraction Area Change (LV FAC) (Intra-observer)
Time frame: 6-8 months after initial images obtained during surgery
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 23 Sep 2024.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for TEE Image Quality
RecruitingObservational study
Oral Gastric Suctioning Effect on Transesophageal Echo
TEE Image Quality
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Donald Penning, MD study director
HFHS
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Suction orogastric tube which is attached to TEE probe in people with TEE Image Quality, run by Henry Ford Health System at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 23 Sep 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 23 Sep 2024). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Image Quality Assessment Method#1: Difference in Likert Scale Before and After Suctioning (time frame: TEE image sets were acquired after general anesthesia induction (before suction) and after 10minutes (after suction), and the outcome was the difference in image quality. In 6-8 months, investigator C did the same analysis on the same images in one day.). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 23 Sep 2024; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 8 Nov 2026.