Dataset Information

Diagnostic Accuracy of Point-of-Care Lung Ultrasonography and Chest Radiography in Adults With Symptoms Suggestive of Acute Decompensated Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Standard tools used to diagnose pulmonary edema in acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF), including chest radiography (CXR), lack adequate sensitivity, which may delay appropriate diagnosis and treatment. Point-of-care lung ultrasonography (LUS) may be more accurate than CXR, but no meta-analysis of studies directly comparing the 2 tools was previously available.

Objective

To compare the accuracy of LUS with the accuracy of CXR in the diagnosis of cardiogenic pulmonary edema in adult patients presenting with dyspnea.

Data sources

A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases and the gray literature was performed in May 2018. No language or year limits were applied.

Study selection

Study inclusion criteria were a prospective adult cohort of patients presenting to any clinical setting with dyspnea who underwent both LUS and CXR on initial assessment with imaging results compared with a reference standard ADHF diagnosis by a clinical expert after either a medical record review or a combination of echocardiography findings and brain-type natriuretic peptide criteria. Two reviewers independently assessed the studies for inclusion criteria, and disagreements were resolved with discussion.

Data extraction and synthesis

Reporting adhered to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias using a customized QUADAS-2 tool. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of LUS and CXR were determined using a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic approach.

Main outcomes and measures

The comparative accuracy of LUS and CXR in diagnosing ADHF as measured by the differences between the 2 modalities in pooled sensitivity and specificity.

Results

The literature search yielded 1377 nonduplicate titles that were screened, of which 43 articles (3.1%) underwent full-text review. Six studies met the inclusion criteria, representing a total of 1827 patients. Pooled estimates for LUS were 0.88 (95% Cl, 0.75-0.95) for sensitivity and 0.90 (95% Cl, 0.88-0.92) for specificity. Pooled estimates for CXR were 0.73 (95% CI, 0.70-0.76) for sensitivity and 0.90 (95% CI, 0.75-0.97) for specificity. The relative sensitivity ratio of LUS, compared with CXR, was 1.2 (95% CI, 1.08-1.34; P?Conclusions and relevanceThe findings suggest that LUS is more sensitive than CXR in detecting pulmonary edema in ADHF; LUS should be considered as an adjunct imaging modality in the evaluation of patients with dyspnea at risk of ADHF.

SUBMITTER: Maw AM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6484641 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Diagnostic Accuracy of Point-of-Care Lung Ultrasonography and Chest Radiography in Adults With Symptoms Suggestive of Acute Decompensated Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Maw Anna M AM Hassanin Ahmed A Ho P Michael PM McInnes Matthew D F MDF Moss Angela A Juarez-Colunga Elizabeth E Soni Nilam J NJ Miglioranza Marcelo H MH Platz Elke E DeSanto Kristen K Sertich Anthony P AP Salame Gerald G Daugherty Stacie L SL

JAMA network open 20190301 3

<h4>Importance</h4>Standard tools used to diagnose pulmonary edema in acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF), including chest radiography (CXR), lack adequate sensitivity, which may delay appropriate diagnosis and treatment. Point-of-care lung ultrasonography (LUS) may be more accurate than CXR, but no meta-analysis of studies directly comparing the 2 tools was previously available.<h4>Objective</h4>To compare the accuracy of LUS with the accuracy of CXR in the diagnosis of cardiogenic pulmona ...[more]

PMID: 30874784

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThe chest X-ray (CXR) is the most readily available and common imaging modality for the assessment of pneumonia. However, detecting pneumonia from chest radiography is a challenging task, even for experienced radiologists. An artificial intelligence (AI) model might help to diagnose pneumonia from CXR more quickly and accurately. We aim to develop an AI model for pneumonia from CXR images and to evaluate diagnostic performance with external dataset.MethodsTo train the pneumonia model, a total of 157,016 CXR images from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Korean National Tuberculosis Association (KNTA) were used (normal vs. pneumonia = 120,722 vs.36,294). An ensemble model of two neural networks with DenseNet classifies each CXR image into pneumonia or not. To test the accuracy of the models, a separate external dataset of pneumonia CXR images (n = 212) from a tertiary university hospital (Gachon University Gil Medical Center GUGMC, Incheon, South Korea) was used; the diagnosis of pneumonia was based on both the chest CT findings and clinical information, and the performance evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Moreover, we tested the change of the AI probability score for pneumonia using the follow-up CXR images (7 days after the diagnosis of pneumonia, n = 100).ResultsWhen the probability scores of the models that have a threshold of 0.5 for pneumonia, two models (models 1 and 4) having different pre-processing parameters on the histogram equalization distribution showed best AUC performances of 0.973 and 0.960, respectively. As expected, the ensemble model of these two models performed better than each of the classification models with 0.983 AUC. Furthermore, the AI probability score change for pneumonia showed a significant difference between improved cases and aggravated cases (Δ = -0.06 ± 0.14 vs. 0.06 ± 0.09, for 85 improved cases and 15 aggravated cases, respectively, P = 0.001) for CXR taken as a 7-day follow-up.ConclusionsThe ensemble model combined two different classification models for pneumonia that performed at 0.983 AUC for an external test dataset from a completely different data source. Furthermore, AI probability scores showed significant changes between cases of different clinical prognosis, which suggest the possibility of increased efficiency and performance of the CXR reading at the diagnosis and follow-up evaluation for pneumonia.

Project description:IntroductionUltrasonography is being increasingly utilized in acute care settings with expanding applications. Pneumothorax evaluation by ultrasonography is a fast, safe, easy and inexpensive alternative to chest radiographs. In this review, we provide a comprehensive analysis of the current literature comparing ultrasonography and chest radiography for the diagnosis of pneumothorax.MethodsWe searched English-language articles in MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library dealing with both ultrasonography and chest radiography for diagnosis of pneumothorax. In eligible studies that met strict inclusion criteria, we conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of pleural ultrasonography in comparison with chest radiography for the diagnosis of pneumothorax.ResultsWe reviewed 601 articles and selected 25 original research articles for detailed review. Only 13 articles met all of our inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. One study used lung sliding sign alone, 12 studies used lung sliding and comet tail signs, and 6 studies searched for lung point in addition to the other two signs. Ultrasonography had a pooled sensitivity of 78.6% (95% CI, 68.1 to 98.1) and a specificity of 98.4% (95% CI, 97.3 to 99.5). Chest radiography had a pooled sensitivity of 39.8% (95% CI, 29.4 to 50.3) and a specificity of 99.3% (95% CI, 98.4 to 100). Our meta-regression and subgroup analyses indicate that consecutive sampling of patients compared to convenience sampling provided higher sensitivity results for both ultrasonography and chest radiography. Consecutive versus nonconsecutive sampling and trauma versus nontrauma settings were significant sources of heterogeneity. In addition, subgroup analysis showed significant variations related to operator and type of probe used.ConclusionsOur study indicates that ultrasonography is more accurate than chest radiography for detection of pneumothorax. The results support the previous investigations in this field, add new valuable information obtained from subgroup analysis, and provide accurate estimates for the performance parameters of both bedside ultrasonography and chest radiography for pneumothorax evaluation.

Project description:Clinical relevanceThis study identifies key signs and symptoms of acute conjunctivitis, that when combined with a point-of-care test, can improve clinician accuracy of diagnosing adenoviral conjunctivitis.BackgroundAdenoviral conjunctivitis is a common ocular infection with the potential for high economic impact due to widespread outbreaks and subsequent furloughs from work and school. In this report, we describe clinical signs and participant-reported symptoms that most accurately identify polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-confirmed adenoviral conjunctivitis.MethodsAdults with 'red eye' symptoms of four days or less were enrolled. Participants rated 10 ocular symptoms from 0 (not bothersome) to 10 (very bothersome), and indicated the presence or absence of systemic flu-like symptoms. Clinicians determined the presence or absence of swollen lymph nodes and rated the severity of eight ocular signs using a 5-point scale. An immunoassay targeting adenovirus antigen was utilised for the point-of-care test, and conjunctival swab samples were obtained for subsequent adenovirus detection by PCR analyses. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to identify symptoms and signs associated with PCR-confirmed adenoviral conjunctivitis. The diagnostic accuracy of these clinical findings, and the potential benefit of incorporating point-of-care test results, was assessed by calculating areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC).ResultsClinician-rated bulbar conjunctival redness, participant-rated eyelid swelling and overall ocular discomfort had the best predictive value in the multivariate logistic regression model with an AUC of 0.83. The addition of the point-of-care test results to these three clinical sign/symptom scores improved diagnostic accuracy, increasing the AUC to 0.94.ConclusionsConjunctival redness severity and participant-reported eyelid swelling and overall discomfort, along with adenoviral point-of-care test results, were highly predictive in identifying individuals with PCR-confirmed adenoviral conjunctivitis. Improved diagnostic accuracy by clinicians at the initial presenting visit could prevent unnecessary work furloughs and facilitate earlier treatment decisions.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the accuracy of bedside ultrasound for confirmation of central venous catheter position and exclusion of pneumothorax compared with chest radiography. DATA SOURCES:PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, reference lists, conference proceedings and ClinicalTrials.gov. STUDY SELECTION:Articles and abstracts describing the diagnostic accuracy of bedside ultrasound compared with chest radiography for confirmation of central venous catheters in sufficient detail to reconstruct 2?×?2 contingency tables were reviewed. Primary outcomes included the accuracy of confirming catheter positioning and detecting a pneumothorax. Secondary outcomes included feasibility, interrater reliability, and efficiency to complete bedside ultrasound confirmation of central venous catheter position. DATA EXTRACTION:Investigators abstracted study details including research design and sonographic imaging technique to detect catheter malposition and procedure-related pneumothorax. Diagnostic accuracy measures included pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio. DATA SYNTHESIS:Fifteen studies with 1,553 central venous catheter placements were identified with a pooled sensitivity and specificity of catheter malposition by ultrasound of 0.82 (0.77-0.86) and 0.98 (0.97-0.99), respectively. The pooled positive and negative likelihood ratios of catheter malposition by ultrasound were 31.12 (14.72-65.78) and 0.25 (0.13-0.47). The sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound for pneumothorax detection was nearly 100% in the participating studies. Bedside ultrasound reduced mean central venous catheter confirmation time by 58.3 minutes. Risk of bias and clinical heterogeneity in the studies were high. CONCLUSIONS:Bedside ultrasound is faster than radiography at identifying pneumothorax after central venous catheter insertion. When a central venous catheter malposition exists, bedside ultrasound will identify four out of every five earlier than chest radiography.

Dataset Information

Diagnostic Accuracy of Point-of-Care Lung Ultrasonography and Chest Radiography in Adults With Symptoms Suggestive of Acute Decompensated Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance

Objective

Data sources

Study selection

Data extraction and synthesis

Main outcomes and measures

Results

Publications

Diagnostic Accuracy of Point-of-Care Lung Ultrasonography and Chest Radiography in Adults With Symptoms Suggestive of Acute Decompensated Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets