Comparative investigation of hepatic and renal anatomy using a deep penetrating versus standard ultrasound probe in an obese population

Comparative investigation of hepatic and renal anatomy using a deep penetrating versus standard ultrasound probe in an obese population - DeepSono

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Observational

Source

DRKS

Registry ID

DRKS00023498

Enrollment

Registered

2020-12-09

Start date

2021-05-20

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2025-04-07

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

E66.0

Interventions

Group 1: Group 1: Individuals with overweight (body mass index, BMI, 25-29,9 kg/m2) Group 2: Individuals with obesity, grade I (BMI 30-34,9 kg/m2) Group 3: Individuals with obesity, grade II (BMI 35-

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Age

18 Years to No maximum

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: - Written informed consent - Abilty to have an ultrasound exam performed - age = 18 years Subcohorts Group 1: Individuals with overweight (body mass index, BMI, 25-29,9 kg/m2) Group 2: Individuals with obesity, grade I (BMI 30-34,9 kg/m2) Group 3: Individuals with obesity, grade II (BMI 35-39,9 kg/m2) Group 4: Individuals with obesity, grade III (BMI = 40 kg/m2) Group 5: non-obese/overweight individuals (BMI 18,5-24,9 kg/m2), physiologic hepatic and right renal ultrasound anatomy, no diseases with respect to the abdomen

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: - Pregnancy/lactating - Altered liver anatomy, e.g. due to surgery - Altered right renal anatomy, e.g. due to surgery - Aczites, peri-hepatic - History of complex abdominal surgery - Meteorism in area of investigation

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Evaluation of liver and renal (right kidney) ultrasound imaging and anatomy in individuals with overweight/obesity grade I-III (groups 1-4) versus non-obese/overweight individuals (group 5) using bioacoustic imagine (ultrasound probe 1) versus standard-of-care, high end ultrasound probes (probe 2: Siemens Convex High-End Routine; probe 3: Canon 8CX1).	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
- Semiquantitative analysis of heaptic steatosis comparing probe 1 versus 2 and 3 in groups 1-4. - Comparison of hepatic image quality using probe 1 versus 2 and 3 in groups 1-5. - Assessment of right renal anatomy comparing probe 1 versus 2 and 3. - Assessment of hepatic and renal vessels comparing probe 1 versus 2 and 3 in groups 1-5. - Comparison of shear-wave-elastography results using probe 1 and 2 relative to FibroScan. - Comparison of visualization of structures within the liver phantom using probe 1 versus 2 and 3. - Comparison of liver phantom image quality using probe 1 versus 2 and 3.	—

Measure

Time frame

- Semiquantitative analysis of heaptic steatosis comparing probe 1 versus 2 and 3 in groups 1-4. - Comparison of hepatic image quality using probe 1 versus 2 and 3 in groups 1-5. - Assessment of right renal anatomy comparing probe 1 versus 2 and 3. - Assessment of hepatic and renal vessels comparing probe 1 versus 2 and 3 in groups 1-5. - Comparison of shear-wave-elastography results using probe 1 and 2 relative to FibroScan. - Comparison of visualization of structures within the liver phantom using probe 1 versus 2 and 3. - Comparison of liver phantom image quality using probe 1 versus 2 and 3.

—

Countries

Germany

Contacts

Public ContactThomas Karlas

Klinik und Poliklinik für Onkologie, Gastroenterologie, Hepatologie, Pneumologie und Infektiologie Bereich GastroenterologieUniversitätsklinikum Leipzig

thomas.karlas@medizin.uni-leipzig.de0341/97-12200

Outcome results

None listed

Source: DRKS (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 10, 2026