ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to examine the feasibility of an optical see-through head-mounted display (OST-HMD) to improve ergonomics during ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) in the neck region. METHODS: This randomized controlled study compared an OST-HMD with a normal ultrasound monitor during an ultrasound-guided FNA in the neck region. Patients with a neck tumor were recruited and randomized into one of two groups. Two practitioners performed ultrasound-guided FNA with or without the HMD, as indicated. An independent researcher measured the procedure time, the number and time of head movements, as well as the number of needle redirections. In addition, practitioners completed questionnaires after performing the FNA on each patient. RESULTS: In 93% of the sessions with the OST-HMD, practitioners performed ultrasound-guided FNA without turning the patients' heads. There was no difference in procedural time and number of needle redirections between the two groups. Results from the questionnaire revealed not only good wearability and low fatigue, but also the practitioners' preference for the HMD. CONCLUSIONS: The OST-HMD improved the practitioners' ergonomics and can be adopted for performing ultrasound-guided interventional procedures in clinical settings.
Subject(s)
Data Display , Ergonomics/methods , Head and Neck Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Head and Neck Neoplasms/pathology , Ultrasonography, Interventional/methods , Biopsy, Fine-Needle , Feasibility Studies , Female , Head , Head Movements , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neck/diagnostic imaging , Neck/pathology , Prospective StudiesABSTRACT
Despite the positive impact of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on reducing mortality, a small percentage of patients experience poor myocardial reperfusion following PCI. However, factors associated with no-reflow remain unclear. We investigated clinical factors associated with no-reflow following PCI for coronary artery disease (CAD). We retrospectively analyzed 1622 consecutive CAD patients who underwent PCI over a 5-year period at our institution. Patients were divided into two groups according to the presence (n = 31) or absence (n = 1591) of no-reflow, defined as Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction flow grade <3 after PCI. No significant differences in patient characteristics or PCI strategy were seen between the no-reflow and normal flow groups. The incidence of no-reflow was significantly lower in the left circumflex artery (LCx) than in the left anterior descending artery (LAD) (P = 0.0015), with no differences in characteristics or PCI strategy between these two target vessels. Multivariate analysis revealed that involvement of the LCx was an independent protective factor against no-reflow (odds ratio 0.14, 95 % confidence interval 0.02-0.98, P = 0.044). In conclusion, LCx as the target vessel was protective against no-reflow compared with LAD following PCI for CAD. Our results suggest that embolic protection devices may be unnecessary in CAD patients with involvement of LCx.