Higher Accuracy of Lung Ultrasound over Chest X-ray for Early Diagnosis of COVID-19 Pneumonia.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
The COVID-19 pandemic rapidly strained healthcare systems worldwide. The reference standard for diagnosis is a positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test, but results are not immediate and sensibility is variable.Aim
To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of lung ultrasound compared to chest X-ray for COVID-19 pneumonia.Design and setting
A retrospective analysis of symptomatic patients admitted into one primary care centre in Spain between March and September 2020.Method
Patients' chest X-rays and lung ultrasounds were categorized as normal or pathologic. RT-PCR confirmed COVID-19 infection. Pathologic lung ultrasound images were further categorized as showing either local or diffuse interstitial disease. McNemar and Fisher tests were used to compare diagnostic accuracy.Results
Most of the 212 patients presented fever at admission, either as a standalone symptom (37.74% of patients) or together with others (72.17% of patients). The positive predictive value of the lung ultrasound was 90% for the diffuse interstitial pattern and 46.92% for local pattern. The lung ultrasound had a significantly higher sensitivity (82.75%) (p < 0.001), but lower specificity (71%) than the chest X-ray (54.02% and 86%, respectively) (p = 0.008) for identifying interstitial lung disease. Moreover, sensitivity of the lung ultrasound for severe interstitial disease was 100%, and was significantly higher than the chest X-ray (58.33%) (p = 0.002).Conclusion
The lung ultrasound is more accurate than the chest X-ray for identifying patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and it is especially useful for those presenting diffuse interstitial disease.
SUBMITTER: Martinez Redondo J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8037158 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the diagnostic value of lung ultrasound (LUS) in comparison to chest radiography (CXR) in children with pneumonia.MethodsComputer-based retrieval was performed on PubMed and EMBASE. Quality was evaluated according to the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies-2, and Meta-Disc was adopted to perform meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was assessed using Q and I statistics. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) as the primary outcomes were calculated for each index test.ResultsTwenty two studies with a total of 2470 patients met the inclusion criteria. Our results showed that the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and DOR for children with pneumonia diagnosed by LUS were 0.95 (95% CI: 0.94 to 0.96), 0.90 (95% CI: 0.87 to 0.92), and 137.49 (95% CI: 60.21 to 313.98), respectively. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and DOR for pediatric pneumonia diagnosed by CXR was 0.91 (95% CI: 0.90 to 0.93), 1.00 (95% CI: 0.99 to 1.00), and 369.66 (95% CI: 137.14 to 996.47), respectively. Four clinical signs, including pulmonary consolidation, positive air bronchogram, abnormal pleural line, and pleural effusion were most frequently observed using LUS in the screening of children with pneumonia.ConclusionsThe available evidence suggests that LUS is a reliable, valuable, and alternative method to CXR for the diagnosis of pediatric pneumonia.
| S-EPMC7738074 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION: The clinical picture of the pandemic influenza A (H1N1)v ranges from a self-limiting afebrile infection to a rapidly progressive pneumonia. Prompt diagnosis and well-timed treatment are recommended. Chest radiography (CRx) often fails to detect the early interstitial stage. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of bedside chest ultrasonography (US) in the early management of the 2009 influenza A (H1N1)v infection. METHODS: 98 patients who arrived in the Emergency Department complaining of influenza-like symptoms were enrolled in the study. Patients not displaying symptoms of acute respiratory distress were discharged without further investigations. Among patients with clinical suggestion of a community-acquired pneumonia, cases encountering other diagnoses or comorbidities were excluded from the study. Clinical history, laboratory tests, CRx, and computed tomography (CT) scan, if indicated, contributed to define the diagnosis of pneumonia in the remaining patients. Chest US was performed by an emergency physician, looking for presence of interstitial syndrome, alveolar consolidation, pleural line abnormalities, and pleural effusion, in 34 patients with a final diagnosis of pneumonia, in 16 having normal initial CRx, and in 33 without pneumonia, as controls. RESULTS: Chest US was carried out without discomfort in all subjects, requiring a relatively short time (9 minutes; range, 7 to 13 minutes). An abnormal US pattern was detected in 32 of 34 patients with pneumonia (94.1%). A prevalent US pattern of interstitial syndrome was depicted in 15 of 16 patients with normal initial CRx, of whom 10 (62.5%) had a final diagnosis of viral (H1N1) pneumonia. Patients with pneumonia and abnormal initial CRx, of whom only four had a final diagnosis of viral (H1N1) pneumonia (22.2%; P<0.05), mainly displayed an US pattern of alveolar consolidation. Finally, a positive US pattern of interstitial syndrome was found in five of 33 controls (15.1%). False negatives were found in two (5.9%) of 34 cases, and false positives, in five (15.1%) of 33 cases, with sensitivity of 94.1%, specificity of 84.8%, positive predictive value of 86.5%, and negative predictive value of 93.3%. CONCLUSIONS: Bedside chest US represents an effective tool for diagnosing pneumonia in the Emergency Department. It can accurately provide early-stage detection of patients with (H1N1)v pneumonia having an initial normal CRx. Its routine integration into their clinical management is proposed.
| S-EPMC3396276 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeChest computed tomography (CT) is considered a reliable imaging tool for COVID-19 pneumonia diagnosis, while lung ultrasound (LUS) has emerged as a potential alternative to characterize lung involvement. The aim of the study was to compare diagnostic performance of admission chest CT and LUS for the diagnosis of COVID-19.MethodsWe included patients admitted to emergency department between February 21-March 6, 2020 (high prevalence group, HP) and between March 30-April 13, 2020 (moderate prevalence group, MP) undergoing LUS and chest CT within 12 h. Chest CT was considered positive in case of "indeterminate"/"typical" pattern for COVID-19 by RSNA classification system. At LUS, thickened pleural line with ≥ three B-lines at least in one zone of the 12 explored was considered positive. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and AUC were calculated for CT and LUS against real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and serology as reference standard.ResultsThe study included 486 patients (males 61 %; median age, 70 years): 247 patients in HP (COVID-19 prevalence 94 %) and 239 patients in MP (COVID-19 prevalence 45 %). In HP and MP respectively, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were 90-95 %, 43-69 %, 96-72 %, 20-95 % for CT and 94-93 %, 7-31 %, 94-52 %, 7-83 % for LUS. CT demonstrated better performance than LUS in diagnosis of COVID-19, both in HP (AUC 0.75 vs 0.51; P < 0.001) and MP (AUC 0.85 vs 0.62; P < 0.001).ConclusionsAdmission chest CT shows better performance than LUS for COVID-19 diagnosis, at varying disease prevalence. LUS is highly sensitive, but not specific for COVID-19.
| S-EPMC7543736 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Lung ultrasonography (LUS) is being increasingly utilized in emergency and critical settings. We performed a systematic review of the current literature to compare the accuracy of LUS and chest radiography (CR) for the diagnosis of adult community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). We searched in Pub Med, EMBASE dealing with both LUS and CR for diagnosis of adult CAP, and conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of LUS in comparison with CR. The diagnostic standard that the index test compared was the hospital discharge diagnosis or the result of chest computed tomography scan as a "gold standard". We calculated pooled sensitivity and specificity using the Mantel-Haenszel method and pooled diagnostic odds ratio using the DerSimonian-Laird method. Five articles met our inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. Using hospital discharge diagnosis as reference, LUS had a pooled sensitivity of 0.95 (0.93-0.97) and a specificity of 0.90 (0.86 to 0.94), CR had a pooled sensitivity of 0.77 (0.73 to 0.80) and a specificity of 0.91 (0.87 to 0.94). LUS and CR compared with computed tomography scan in 138 patients in total, the Z statistic of the two summary receiver operating characteristic was 3.093 (P = 0.002), the areas under the curve for LUS and CR were 0.901 and 0.590, respectively. Our study indicates that LUS can help to diagnosis adult CAP by clinicians and the accuracy was better compared with CR using chest computed tomography scan as the gold standard.
| S-EPMC4479467 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundChest radiography (CXR) and computerized tomography (CT) are the standard methods for lung imaging in diagnosing COVID-19 pneumonia in the intensive care unit (ICU), despite their limitations. This study aimed to assess the performance of bedside lung ultrasound examination by a critical care physician for the diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia during acute admission to the ICU.MethodThis was an observational, prospective, single-center study conducted in the intensive care unit of Adan General Hospital from April 10, 2020, to May 26, 2020. The study included adults with suspicion of COVID-19 Infection who were transferred to the ICU. Patients were admitted to the ICU directly from the ED after reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) swabs were sent to the central virology laboratory in Kuwait, and the results were released 16 to 24 hours after the time of admission. A certified intensivist in critical care ultrasound performed the lung ultrasound within 12 hours of the patient's admission to the ICU.The treating physician confirmed the diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia based on a set of clinical features, inflammatory markers, biochemical profile studies, RT-PCR test results, and CXR.ResultsOf 77 patients with suspected COVID-19 pneumonia, 65 (84.4%) were confirmed. The median age of the patients was 48 (31-68) years, and 51 (71%) were men.In the group of patients with confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia, LUS revealed four signs suggestive of COVID-19 pneumonia in 63 patients (96.9%) (sensitivity 96.9%, CI 85%-99.5%). Two patients presented with unilateral lobar pneumonia without other ultrasonic signs of COVID-19 pneumonia but with positive RT-PCR results. Among patients in the group without COVID-19 pneumonia who had negative RT-PCR results, 11 (91.7%) were LUS negative for COVID-19 pneumonia (specificity 91.7%, 95% CI 58.72%-99.77%).ConclusionsDuring the COVID-19 outbreak, LUS allows the identification of early signs of interstitial pneumonia. LUS patterns that show a combination of the four major signs offer high sensitivity and specificity compared to nasopharyngeal RT-PCR.
| S-EPMC8142626 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionChest ultrasound is increasingly used to radiologically diagnose childhood pneumonia, but there are limited data on its use for pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB).AimCompare chest ultrasound with a chest X-ray (CXR) findings.MethodsChildren (up to 13 years) with suspected PTB were enrolled. Bedside chest ultrasound findings were compared to CXR. The analysis was stratified by PTB category: confirmed PTB (microbiologically confirmed), unconfirmed PTB (clinical diagnosis with negative microbiological tests), or unlikely PTB (other respiratory diseases with improvement without tuberculosis treatment).ResultsOne hundred fifty-nine children were enrolled (57% boys, median age 26.6 months [interquartile range 15.1-59.3]). Ultrasound detected abnormalities in 72% (n?=?114), CXR in 56% (n?=?89), P?<?.001. Pleural effusion was detected on ultrasound in 15% (n?=?24) compared 9% (n?=?14) on CXR, P?=?.004, more in confirmed PTB (33%, n?=?12 vs 8%, n?=?4 unlikely PTB, P?=?.013). Ultrasound detected enlarged mediastinal lymph nodes more commonly (22%, n?=?25) than CXR (6%, n?=?10, P?=?.001); the size of lymph nodes in the unlikely category (1.0?cm) was smaller than the other two PTB categories (1.4 and 1.5?cm, P?=?.001). Inter-reader agreement (kappa Cohen) was higher for ultrasound than CXR for several findings (consolidation 0.67 vs 0.47, pleural effusion 0.86 vs 0.56, enlarged lymph nodes 0.56 vs 0.27).ConclusionUltrasound detected abnormalities more frequently than CXR with the higher inter-reader agreement; ultrasound abnormalities were most common in children with confirmed PTB. Ultrasound is a promising modality for detecting abnormalities in PTB. Further studies should evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound against a gold standard.
| S-EPMC6899616 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Guidelines currently do not recommend the routine use of chest x-ray (CXR) in bronchiolitis. However, CXR is still performed in a high percentage of cases, mainly to diagnose or rule out pneumonia. The inappropriate use of CXR results in children exposure to ionizing radiations and increased medical costs. Lung Ultrasound (LUS) has become an emerging diagnostic tool for diagnosing pneumonia in the last decades. The purpose of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy and reliability of LUS for the detection of pneumonia in hospitalized children with bronchiolitis and to evaluate the agreement between LUS and CXR in diagnosing pneumonia in these patients. METHODS:We enrolled children admitted to our hospital in 2016-2017 with a diagnosis of bronchiolitis and undergone CXR because of clinical suspicion of concomitant pneumonia. LUS was performed in each child by a pediatrician blinded to the patient's clinical, laboratory and CXR findings. An exploratory analysis was done in the first 30 patients to evaluate the inter-observer agreement between a pediatrician and a radiologist who independently performed LUS. The diagnosis of pneumonia was established by an expert clinician based on the recommendations of the British Thoracic Society guidelines. RESULTS:Eighty seven children with bronchiolitis were investigated. A final diagnosis of concomitant pneumonia was made in 25 patients. Sensitivity and specificity of LUS for the diagnosis of pneumonia were 100% and 83.9% respectively, with an area under-the-curve of 0.92, while CXR showed a sensitivity of 96% and specificity of 87.1%. When only consolidation >?1?cm was considered consistent with pneumonia, the specificity of LUS increased to 98.4% and the sensitivity decreased to 80.0%, with an area under-the-curve of 0.89. Cohen's kappa between pediatrician and radiologist sonologists in the first 30 patients showed an almost perfect agreement in diagnosing pneumonia by LUS (K 0.93). CONCLUSIONS:This study shows the good accuracy of LUS in diagnosing pneumonia in children with clinical bronchiolitis. When including only consolidation size >?1?cm, specificity of LUS was higher than CXR, avoiding the need to perform CXR in these patients. Added benefit of LUS included high inter-observer agreement. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Identifier: NCT03280732 . Registered 12 September 2017 (retrospectively registered).
| S-EPMC6286612 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn order to improve lung cancer survival in the UK, a greater proportion of resectable cancers must be diagnosed. It is likely that resectability rates would be increased by more timely diagnosis. Aside from screening, the only way of achieving this is to reduce the time to diagnosis in symptomatic cancers. Currently, lung cancers are mainly diagnosed by general practitioners (GPs) using the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines for urgent referral for chest X-ray, which recommend urgent imaging or referral for patients who have one of a number of chest symptoms for more than 3 weeks. We are proposing to expand this recommendation to include one of a number of chest symptoms of any duration in higher-risk patients.Methods/designWe intend to conduct a trial of imaging in these higher-risk patients and compare it with NICE guidelines to see if imaging improves stage at diagnosis and resection rates. This trial would have to be large (and consequently resource-intensive) because most of these patients will not have lung cancer, making optimal design crucial. We are therefore conducting a pilot trial that will ascertain the feasibility of running a full trial and provide key information that will be required in order to design the full trial.DiscussionThis trial will assess the feasibility and inform the design of a large, UK-wide, clinical trial of a change to the NICE guidelines for urgent referral for chest X-ray for suspected lung cancer. It utilizes a combination of workshop, health economic, quality of life, qualitative, and quantitative methods in order to fully assess feasibility.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT01344005.
| S-EPMC4222751 | biostudies-literature
Project description: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.
| S-EPMC7926899 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:In children with pneumonia, chest x-ray (CXR) is typically the first imaging modality used for diagnostic work-up. Repeated CXR or computed tomography (CT) are often necessary if complications such as abscesses or empyema arise, thus increasing radiation exposure. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the potential of radiation-free chest magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to detect complications at baseline and follow-up, compared to CXR with and without additional lung ultrasound (LUS). METHODS:Paired MRI and CXR scans were retrospectively reviewed by two blinded readers for presence and severity of pulmonary abscess, consolidation, bronchial wall thickening, mucus plugging and pleural effusion/empyema using a chest MRI scoring system. The scores for MRI and CXR were compared at baseline and follow-up. Furthermore, the MRI scores at baseline with and without contrast media were evaluated. RESULTS:33 pediatric patients (6.3±4.6 years), who had 33 paired MRI and CXR scans at baseline and 12 at follow-up were included. MRI detected significantly more lung abscess formations with a prevalence of 72.7% compared to 27.3% by CXR at baseline (p = 0.001), whereas CXR+LUS was nearly as good as MRI. MRI also showed a higher sensitivity in detecting empyema (p = 0.003). At follow-up, MRI also showed a slightly better sensitivity regarding residual abscesses. The overall severity of disease was rated higher on MRI. Contrast material did not improve detection of abscesses or empyema by MRI. CONCLUSION:CXR and LUS seem to be sufficient in most cases. In cases where LUS cannot be realized or the combination of CXR+LUS might be not sufficient, MRI, as a radiation free modality, should be preferred to CT. Furthermore, the admission of contrast media is not mandatory in this context.
| S-EPMC7082029 | biostudies-literature