High-end versus Low-end Thermal Imaging for Detection of Arterial Perforators

Background:. Thermal imaging was first reported as a method for detection of arterial perforators in 1968 and has since been shown to be an extremely accurate way to assess perforators with an audible Doppler signal, using high-end professional thermal cameras. This technology has recently become ea...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Magnús Pétur Bjarnason Obinah, MD, Monica Nielsen, DVM, Lisbet Rosenkrantz Hölmich, DMSc, MD
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer 2020-10-01
Series:Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Global Open
Online Access:http://journals.lww.com/prsgo/fulltext/10.1097/GOX.0000000000003175
id doaj-f4c6b2a24f804fbbb3940b5bf742286a
record_format Article
spelling doaj-f4c6b2a24f804fbbb3940b5bf742286a2020-12-23T08:14:28ZengWolters KluwerPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Global Open2169-75742020-10-01810e317510.1097/GOX.0000000000003175202010000-00044High-end versus Low-end Thermal Imaging for Detection of Arterial PerforatorsMagnús Pétur Bjarnason Obinah, MD0Monica Nielsen, DVM1Lisbet Rosenkrantz Hölmich, DMSc, MD2From the * Department of Plastic Surgery, Herlev and Gentofte University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark† Faculty of Health and Medical Science, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, DenmarkFrom the * Department of Plastic Surgery, Herlev and Gentofte University Hospital, Copenhagen, DenmarkBackground:. Thermal imaging was first reported as a method for detection of arterial perforators in 1968 and has since been shown to be an extremely accurate way to assess perforators with an audible Doppler signal, using high-end professional thermal cameras. This technology has recently become easily accessible with the advent of smartphone-compatible, low-end thermal cameras. Several groups have reported on the use of these devices in the pre-, intra-, and postoperative phase, yet there have been few attempts to validate them against existing methods or compare them with high-end thermal cameras. Methods:. The aim of this study was to compare a low-end smartphone-compatible thermal camera, the FLIR ONE Pro (ONEPro), priced US $400, with a high-end thermal camera the FLIR A35sc (A35sc), priced US $5000, for the detection of arterial perforators on the anterolateral thigh, using a handheld Doppler and Color Doppler Ultrasound to verify the results. Results:. We examined 23 thighs in 13 healthy volunteers and identified a total of 779 hotspots using both cameras. The A35sc identified on average 33.5 hotspots per thigh. The ONEPro identified on average 31.5 hotspots per thigh. Using a handheld Doppler, we confirmed 95.9% of hotspots identified with the ONEPro and 95.8% of hotspots identified with the A35sc. Using Color Doppler Ultrasound, we confirmed 95% of hotspots identified using the ONEPro and 94.9% of hotspots identified with the A35sc. Conclusion:. While the high-end camera identified slightly more hotspots, verification data were very similar for the 2 cameras, and for clinical purposes these differences are negligible.http://journals.lww.com/prsgo/fulltext/10.1097/GOX.0000000000003175
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Magnús Pétur Bjarnason Obinah, MD
Monica Nielsen, DVM
Lisbet Rosenkrantz Hölmich, DMSc, MD
spellingShingle Magnús Pétur Bjarnason Obinah, MD
Monica Nielsen, DVM
Lisbet Rosenkrantz Hölmich, DMSc, MD
High-end versus Low-end Thermal Imaging for Detection of Arterial Perforators
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Global Open
author_facet Magnús Pétur Bjarnason Obinah, MD
Monica Nielsen, DVM
Lisbet Rosenkrantz Hölmich, DMSc, MD
author_sort Magnús Pétur Bjarnason Obinah, MD
title High-end versus Low-end Thermal Imaging for Detection of Arterial Perforators
title_short High-end versus Low-end Thermal Imaging for Detection of Arterial Perforators
title_full High-end versus Low-end Thermal Imaging for Detection of Arterial Perforators
title_fullStr High-end versus Low-end Thermal Imaging for Detection of Arterial Perforators
title_full_unstemmed High-end versus Low-end Thermal Imaging for Detection of Arterial Perforators
title_sort high-end versus low-end thermal imaging for detection of arterial perforators
publisher Wolters Kluwer
series Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Global Open
issn 2169-7574
publishDate 2020-10-01
description Background:. Thermal imaging was first reported as a method for detection of arterial perforators in 1968 and has since been shown to be an extremely accurate way to assess perforators with an audible Doppler signal, using high-end professional thermal cameras. This technology has recently become easily accessible with the advent of smartphone-compatible, low-end thermal cameras. Several groups have reported on the use of these devices in the pre-, intra-, and postoperative phase, yet there have been few attempts to validate them against existing methods or compare them with high-end thermal cameras. Methods:. The aim of this study was to compare a low-end smartphone-compatible thermal camera, the FLIR ONE Pro (ONEPro), priced US $400, with a high-end thermal camera the FLIR A35sc (A35sc), priced US $5000, for the detection of arterial perforators on the anterolateral thigh, using a handheld Doppler and Color Doppler Ultrasound to verify the results. Results:. We examined 23 thighs in 13 healthy volunteers and identified a total of 779 hotspots using both cameras. The A35sc identified on average 33.5 hotspots per thigh. The ONEPro identified on average 31.5 hotspots per thigh. Using a handheld Doppler, we confirmed 95.9% of hotspots identified with the ONEPro and 95.8% of hotspots identified with the A35sc. Using Color Doppler Ultrasound, we confirmed 95% of hotspots identified using the ONEPro and 94.9% of hotspots identified with the A35sc. Conclusion:. While the high-end camera identified slightly more hotspots, verification data were very similar for the 2 cameras, and for clinical purposes these differences are negligible.
url http://journals.lww.com/prsgo/fulltext/10.1097/GOX.0000000000003175
work_keys_str_mv AT magnuspeturbjarnasonobinahmd highendversuslowendthermalimagingfordetectionofarterialperforators
AT monicanielsendvm highendversuslowendthermalimagingfordetectionofarterialperforators
AT lisbetrosenkrantzholmichdmscmd highendversuslowendthermalimagingfordetectionofarterialperforators
_version_ 1724372970492657664