scholarly journals Comparison of Lung Ultrasound versus Chest X-ray for Detection of Pulmonary Infiltrates in COVID-19

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 373
Author(s):  
María Mateos González ◽  
Gonzalo García de Casasola Sánchez ◽  
Francisco Javier Teigell Muñoz ◽  
Kevin Proud ◽  
Davide Lourdo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prospective Observational Study ◽  
Lung Ultrasound ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Kappa Statistic ◽  
Attractive Alternative ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Pulmonary Infiltrates ◽  
Chest X Ray ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
B Lines

Point-of-care lung ultrasound (LUS) is an attractive alternative to chest X-ray (CXR), but its diagnostic accuracy compared to CXR has not been well studied in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. We conducted a prospective observational study to assess the correlation between LUS and CXR findings in COVID-19 patients. Ninety-six patients with a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 underwent an LUS exam and CXR upon presentation. Physicians blinded to the CXR findings performed all LUS exams. Detection of pulmonary infiltrates by CXR versus LUS was compared between patients categorized as suspected or confirmed COVID-19 based on reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction. Sensitivities and correlation by Kappa statistic were calculated between LUS and CXR. LUS detected pulmonary infiltrates more often than CXR in both suspected and confirmed COVID-19 subjects. The most common LUS abnormalities were discrete B-lines, confluent B-lines, and small subpleural consolidations. Most important, LUS detected unilateral or bilateral pulmonary infiltrates in 55% of subjects with a normal CXR. Substantial agreement was demonstrated between LUS and CXR for normal, unilateral or bilateral findings (Κ = 0.48 (95% CI 0.34 to 0.63)). In patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19, LUS detected pulmonary infiltrates more often than CXR, including more than half of the patients with a normal CXR.

scholarly journals Sensitivity of lung ultrasound for the detection of pneumothorax one day after pulmonary resection—a prospective observational study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Galetin ◽  
Mark Schieren ◽  
Benjamin Marks ◽  
Jerome Defosse ◽  
Erich Stoelben
Keyword(s):  
Observational Study ◽  
Thoracic Surgery ◽  
Test Performance ◽  
Prospective Observational Study ◽  
Lung Ultrasound ◽  
Lung Resection ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Therapeutic Decisions ◽  
Chest X Ray ◽  
Diagnostic Test Performance

Summary Background Chest X‑ray (CXR) after thoracic surgery contributes to patient discomfort and costs and is of limited therapeutic value. Lung ultrasound (LU) for pneumothorax may be an alternative to CXR, but diagnostic accuracy data are heterogeneous and biased by insufficient sonographic technique and patient selection. Reported sensitivities range from 0.21 to 1.0. We evaluated the sensitivity of LU on the first day after thoracic surgery under routine conditions. Methods We performed a prospective observational study (trial-ID DRKS00014557). Consecutive patients undergoing lung resection received standardized LU in addition to routine CXR on the first postoperative day. Ultrasound examiner and radiologist were blinded to corresponding X‑ray and ultrasound findings. CXR was used as reference to determine diagnostic test performance of ultrasound. The conformity of sonography- and routine-based therapeutic decisions was evaluated. Results A total of 68 patients were examined. The mean duration of ultrasound was 145 ± 64 s. CXR identified 23 patients with pneumothorax with a mean apex-to-cupola size of 1.5 ± 1.0 cm. Ultrasound detected 18 patients with pneumothorax. The computed sensitivity of LU was 0.48 (95% confidence interval [0.36; 0.60]). Specificity was between 0.81 and 1.0, the negative predictive value 0.76 [0.66; 0.86]. The sensitivity of CXR was 0.56 [0.44; 0.68]. Air leakage via chest tube correlated weakly with CXR (spearman’s rho = 0.26) and moderately with LU (rho = 0.43). The conformity between sonographically based recommendations and the actual therapy based on routine diagnostics was 96%. Conclusions Sensitivity of ultrasound for pneumothorax detection nearly reached CXR and resulted in equally safe patient management. Our data can serve as a pilot study for upcoming larger-scaled controlled trials.

scholarly journals COVID-19 Assessment with Bedside Lung Ultrasound in a Population of Intensive Care Patients Treated with Mechanical Ventilation and ECMO

Diagnostics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. 447 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hasse Møller-Sørensen ◽  
Jakob Gjedsted ◽  
Vibeke Lind Jørgensen ◽  
Kristoffer Lindskov Hansen
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care ◽  
Lung Ultrasound ◽  
Imaging Modality ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Intensive Care Patients ◽  
Reactive Protein ◽  
Extracorporal Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Accessible Point ◽  
Chest X Ray

The COVID-19 pandemic has increased the need for an accessible, point-of-care and accurate imaging modality for pulmonary assessment. COVID-19 pneumonia is mainly monitored with chest X-ray, however, lung ultrasound (LUS) is an emerging tool for pulmonary evaluation. In this study, patients with verified COVID-19 disease hospitalized at the intensive care unit and treated with ventilator and extracorporal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) were evaluated with LUS for pulmonary changes. LUS findings were compared to C-reactive protein (CRP) and ventilator settings. Ten patients were included and scanned the day after initiation of ECMO and thereafter every second day until, if possible, weaned from ECMO. In total 38 scans adding up to 228 cineloops were recorded and analyzed off-line with the use of a constructed LUS score. The study indicated that patients with a trend of lower LUS scores over time were capable of being weaned from ECMO. LUS score was associated to CRP (R = 0.34; p < 0.03) and compliance (R = 0.60; p < 0.0001), with the strongest correlation to compliance. LUS may be used as a primary imaging modality for pulmonary assessment reducing the use of chest X-ray in COVID-19 patients treated with ventilator and ECMO.

scholarly journals The use of lung ultrasound during the COVID-19 pandemic

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (SP1) ◽  
pp. e64-e75
Author(s):  
Aly Youssef ◽  
Marta Cavalera ◽  
Carlotta Azzarone ◽  
Carla Serra ◽  
Elena Brunelli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health System ◽  
Pulmonary Infection ◽  
Lung Ultrasound ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Rapid Learning ◽  
Chest X Ray ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
Novel Coronavirus

The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is a challenge to every health system. Unfortunately, it is unlikely that this pandemic will disappear soon. No health system, with its present resources and workflow, is capable enough to deal with a full-blown wave of this pandemic. Acquisition of specific new skills may be fundamental in delivering appropriate health care for our patients. The gold standard for diagnosis of the COVID-19 infection is real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. Radiological investigations (chest X-ray or high-resolution computerized tomography [CT]) can be helpful both for diagnosis and management, but they have many limitations. Ultrasound has been suggested as a reliable and accurate tool for assessing the lungs in COVID-19 patients. Lung ultrasound (LUS) can show specific signs of inter-stitial pneumonia, which is characteristic of COVID-19 pulmonary infection. In addition, nonradiologist specialists with experience in ultrasound can be trained on LUS with a relatively rapid learning curve. In pregnancy, LUS can be particularly useful due to the avoidance of exposure to ionizing radiation. In this review, we present the advantages, techniques, and limitations of the use of LUS during the COVID-19 pandemic, with specific focus on pregnancy.

Lung Ultrasound as a New Technique for Diagnosis of Neonatal Respiratory Diseases

2018 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 224-232 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yasser N. Elsayed
Keyword(s):  
Lung Disease ◽  
Lung Ultrasound ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Point Of Care Ultrasound ◽  
Ultrasound Images ◽  
X Ray ◽  
The Past ◽  
Neonatal Lung ◽  
Chest X Ray ◽  
A New Technique

Point-of-care ultrasound in the NICU is becoming more commonplace and is now used for a number of indications. Over the past ten years, the use of ultrasound as an alternative to a chest x-ray for the diagnosis of neonatal lung disease has been explored, and protocols were developed to refine the interpretation of ultrasound images in neonatal lung disease. The purpose of this column is to briefly explain the physics of ultrasound and describe the application of ultrasound to neonatal lung assessment.

scholarly journals Lung Ultrasound for Initial Diagnosis and Subsequent Monitoring of Aspiration Pneumonia in Elderly in Home Medical Care Setting

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 233372141985844
Author(s):  
Hirofumi Namiki ◽  
Tadashi Kobayashi
Keyword(s):  
Aspiration Pneumonia ◽  
Care Setting ◽  
Lung Ultrasound ◽  
Initial Diagnosis ◽  
Resource Limited Settings ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Resource Limited ◽  
X Ray Imaging ◽  
Chest X Ray ◽  
B Lines

The number of aspiration pneumonia cases has increased in recent times. A definitive diagnosis of aspiration pneumonia is difficult in resource-limited settings where radiological equipment is unavailable. We report the initial diagnosis and subsequent monitoring of aspiration pneumonia in a home medical care setting. An 88-year-old Japanese male presented an acute onset of dyspnea, fever, and productive cough. At home, lung ultrasound displayed pleural effusion along with B-lines and subpleural consolidations. Upon admission, tests revealed increased total leucocyte counts with left-shifted neutrophils, elevated C-reactive protein levels, and positive sputum Gram stain. Chest X-ray imaging and computed tomography (CT) showed bibasilar infiltrates and wall thickening in the left S10 bronchi. The patient was diagnosed with aspiration pneumonia and treated with an antibiotic. After a 10-day hospitalization, lung ultrasound showed some remaining B-lines and disappearance of pleural effusion and subpleural consolidation. Chest X-ray image was normal, and CT revealed pleural abnormality and disappearance of bibasilar infiltrates, consistent with the ultrasound findings. Aspiration pneumonia develops with various clinical signs. However, diagnosis using chest X-ray imaging or CT in resource-limited settings is difficult. Ultrasound might allow physicians to make more accurate judgments, particularly while monitoring aspiration pneumonia following initial diagnosis in resource-limited settings.

scholarly journals Comparison of Chest Ultrasound and Standard X-Ray Imaging in COVID-19 Patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 06 (02) ◽  
pp. E36-E40
Author(s):  
Evgenii Shumilov ◽  
Ali Seif Amir Hosseini ◽  
Golo Petzold ◽  
Hannes Treiber ◽  
Joachim Lotz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Community ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Chest Ultrasound ◽  
Pleural Line ◽  
X Ray Imaging ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Lung Abnormalities ◽  
Chest X Ray ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
B Lines

AbstractThe COVID-19 pandemic poses new challenges for the medical community due to its large number of patients presenting with varying symptoms. Chest ultrasound (ChUS) may be particularly useful in the early clinical management in suspected COVID-19 patients due to its broad availability and rapid application. We aimed to investigate patterns of ChUS in COVID-19 patients and compare the findings with results from chest X-ray (CRX).24 patients (18 symptomatic, 6 asymptomatic) with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction underwent bedside ChUS in addition to CRX following admission. Subsequently, the results of ChUS and CRX were compared.94% (n=17/18) of patients with respiratory symptoms demonstrated lung abnormalities on ChUS. ChUS was especially useful to detect interstitial syndrome compared to CXR in COVID-19 patients (17/18 vs. 11/18; p<0.02). Of note, ChUS also detected lung consolidations very effectively (14/18 for ChUS vs. 7/18 cases for CXR; p<0.02). Besides pathological B-lines and subpleural consolidations, pleural line abnormality (89%; n=16/18) was the third most common feature in patients with respiratory manifestations of COVID-19 detected by ChUS.Our findings support the high value of ChUS in the management of COVID-19 patients.

scholarly journals Lung ultrasound assessment of acute respiratory distress syndrome caused by coronavirus disease 2019: An observational study

2020 ◽  
pp. 102490792096932
Author(s):  
Ruiting Li ◽  
Hong Liu ◽  
Hong Qi ◽  
Yin Yuan ◽  
Xiaojing Zou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
Respiratory Distress Syndrome ◽  
Respiratory Distress ◽  
Distress Syndrome ◽  
Lung Ultrasound ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Characteristic Analysis ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Chest X Ray

Background: An outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) took place in Wuhan, China, by the end of 2019, and the disease continues to spread all over the world. The number of patients is increasing rapidly, a large number of infected patients is critically ill, and the mortality is high. However, information on COVID-19 patients is limited, and its clinical characteristics have not been fully studied. Objectives: To compare the performances of point-of-care lung ultrasound (LUS) and bedside chest X-ray in assessing the condition of COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Methods: This observational study enrolled 42 COVID-19 patients with ARDS who were admitted to the Department of Critical Care Medicine of the Wuhan Union Hospital from February to April 2020. The point-of-care LUS characteristics of the COVID-19 patients with ARDS were summarized, and the performances of LUS and bedside chest X-ray in assessing the patient’s condition were compared. Results: Most of the 42 patients were elderly individuals with chronic clinical diseases. The proportion of patients older than 60 years old was 85.7%. All patients were given invasive mechanical ventilation; eight (19.0%) of them received venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support. LUS has evident advantages in detecting lung consolidation, patchy shadows, and pleural thickening, and pleural line changes in particular. The receiver operating characteristic analysis indicated that the sensitivity, Youden index, and kappa value for detecting COVID-19 patients with ARDS were higher for LUS than the chest X-ray. Conclusion: LUS has better diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity in COVID-19 patients with ARDS than the chest X-ray.

Role of Lung Ultrasound in the Diagnosis of Neonatal Respiratory Disorders

QJM ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 114 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nehal M El Raggal ◽  
laila A Hegazy ◽  
Hossam M Sakr ◽  
Yasmin A Farid ◽  
Osama A Eldafrawy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Neonatal Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Neonatal Intensive Care ◽  
Lung Ultrasound ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Point Of Care Ultrasound ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Chest X Ray

Abstract lung ultrasound (LUS) was used traditionally in the assessment of pleural effusions and masses but LUS has moved towards the imaging of the pulmonary parenchyma, mainly as a point-of-care technique. Objective To assess the agreement between LUS and CXR for the diagnosis of RD in neonates. Methods This prospective cross sectional study was conducted on 100 neonates presents with RD in the first 24 hours of life in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) of the Ain Shams University. All enrolled neonates underwent LUS and CXR initially and on day 7. Neonatologists were blind to the LUS diagnosis and the clinical decisions were driven by CXR findings. Lung score was applied to describe lung aeration, interstitial, alveolar, or consolidation patterns for each lung area. Results 125 different diagnoses were reported in 100 patients. The total agreement between LUS and CXR diagnosis was 96% (95% CI 88–98%) with a κ statistic of 0.94 (95% CI 0.86– 1.00). The agreement for RDS, Pneumonia, TTN, MAS, CDH, PE, Pnumothorax and atelectasis were 99%, 96%,98%, 99%,100%,100%,98% and 98% consequently. Conclusion LUS is a safe, low coast, easy to operate and has high agreement with CXR for the diagnosis of RD in neonates in the first week of life. Key words Neonatal intensive care, Point-of-care ultrasound, Chest X-ray Abbreviations: NICU: Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, LUS: Lung ultrasound, CXR: Chest X ray, RDS: respiratory distress syndrome, TTN: Transient Tachypnea of Newborn, MAS: Meconium Aspiration, PE: pleural effusion, CDH: cong. diaphragmatic hernia.

scholarly journals A Simplified Point-of-Care Lung Ultrasound Protocol to Detect Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Inpatients: A Prospective Observational Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas F Heyne ◽  
Benjamin P. Geisler ◽  
Kay Negishi ◽  
Daniel S. Choi ◽  
Ahad A. Al Saud ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prospective Observational Study ◽  
Lung Ultrasound ◽  
Point Of Care ◽  
Area Under The Curve ◽  
Point Of Care Ultrasound ◽  
Typical Pattern ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Acid Test ◽  
Lower Cutoff ◽  
Operator Curve

Objectives: To assess the diagnostic performance of lung point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) compared to either a positive nucleic acid test (NAT) or a COVID-19-typical pattern on computed tomography (CT) and to evaluate opportunities to simplify a POCUS algorithm. Methods: Hospital-admitted adult inpatients with (1) either confirmed or suspected COVID-19 and (2) a completed or ordered CT within the preceding 24 hours were recruited. Twelve lung zones were scanned with a handheld POCUS machine. POCUS, CT, and X-ray (CXR) images were reviewed independently by blinded experts. A simplified POCUS algorithm was developed via machine learning. Results: Of 79 enrolled subjects, 26.6% had a positive NAT and 31.6% had a CT typical for COVID-19. The receiver operator curve (ROC) for a 12-zone POCUS protocol had an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.787 for positive NAT and 0.820 for typical CT. A simplified four-zone protocol had an AUC of 0.862 for typical CT and 0.862 for positive NAT. CT had an AUC of 0.815 for positive NAT; CXR had AUCs of 0.793 for positive NAT and 0.733 for typical CT. Performance of the four-zone protocol was superior to CXR for positive NAT (p=0.0471). Using a two-point cutoff system, the four-zone POCUS protocol had a sensitivity of 0.920 and 0.904 compared to CT and NAT, respectively, at the lower cutoff; it had a specificity of 0.926 and 0.948 at the higher cutoff, respectively. Conclusion: POCUS outperformed CXR to predict positive NAT. POCUS could potentially replace other chest imaging for persons under investigation for COVID-19.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document