Dataset Information

Lung Ultrasound Score as a Predictor of Mortality in Patients With COVID-19.

ABSTRACT: Background: Lung injury is a common condition among hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, whether lung ultrasound (LUS) score predicts all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19 is unknown. The aim of the present study was to explore the predictive value of lung ultrasound score for mortality in patients with COVID-19. Methods: Patients with COVID-19 who underwent lung ultrasound were prospectively enrolled from three hospitals in Wuhan, China between February 2020 and March 2020. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were collected from digital patient records. Lung ultrasound scores were analyzed offline by two observers. Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Results: Of the 402 patients, 318 (79.1%) had abnormal lung ultrasound. Compared with survivors (n = 360), non-survivors (n = 42) presented with more B2 lines, pleural line abnormalities, pulmonary consolidation, and pleural effusion (all p < 0.05). Moreover, non-survivors had higher global and anterolateral lung ultrasound score than survivors. In the receiver operating characteristic analysis, areas under the curve were 0.936 and 0.913 for global and anterolateral lung ultrasound score, respectively. A cutoff value of 15 for global lung ultrasound score had a sensitivity of 92.9% and specificity of 85.3%, and 9 for anterolateral score had a sensitivity of 88.1% and specificity of 83.3% for prediction of death. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that both global and anterolateral scores were strong predictors of death (both p < 0.001). Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that global lung ultrasound score was an independent predictor (hazard ratio, 1.08; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.16; p = 0.03) of death together with age, male sex, C-reactive protein, and creatine kinase-myocardial band. Conclusion: Lung ultrasound score as a semiquantitative tool can be easily measured by bedside lung ultrasound. It is a powerful predictor of in-hospital mortality and may play a crucial role in risk stratification of patients with COVID-19.

SUBMITTER: Sun Z

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8185027 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundBedside lung ultrasound (LUS) has emerged as a useful and non-invasive tool to detect lung involvement and monitor changes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the clinical significance of the LUS score in patients with COVID-19 remains unknown. We aimed to investigate the prognostic value of the LUS score in patients with COVID-19.MethodThe LUS protocol consisted of 12 scanning zones and was performed in 280 consecutive patients with COVID-19. The LUS score based on B-lines, lung consolidation and pleural line abnormalities was evaluated.ResultsThe median time from admission to LUS examinations was 7 days (interquartile range [IQR] 3-10). Patients in the highest LUS score group were more likely to have a lower lymphocyte percentage (LYM%); higher levels of D-dimer, C-reactive protein, hypersensitive troponin I and creatine kinase muscle-brain; more invasive mechanical ventilation therapy; higher incidence of ARDS; and higher mortality than patients in the lowest LUS score group. After a median follow-up of 14 days [IQR, 10-20 days], 37 patients developed ARDS, and 13 died. Patients with adverse outcomes presented a higher rate of bilateral involvement; more involved zones and B-lines, pleural line abnormalities and consolidation; and a higher LUS score than event-free survivors. The Cox models adding the LUS score as a continuous variable (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.05, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.02 ~ 1.08; P < 0.001; Akaike information criterion [AIC] = 272; C-index = 0.903) or as a categorical variable (HR 10.76, 95% CI 2.75 ~ 42.05; P = 0.001; AIC = 272; C-index = 0.902) were found to predict poor outcomes more accurately than the basic model (AIC = 286; C-index = 0.866). An LUS score cut-off > 12 predicted adverse outcomes with a specificity and sensitivity of 90.5% and 91.9%, respectively.ConclusionsThe LUS score devised by our group performs well at predicting adverse outcomes in patients with COVID-19 and is important for risk stratification in COVID-19 patients.

Project description:Background and objectivesLung Ultrasound Score (LUS) identifies and monitors pneumonia by assigning increasing scores. However, it does not include parameters, such as inferior vena cava (IVC) diameter and index of collapse, diaphragmatic excursions and search for pleural and pericardial effusions. Therefore, we propose a new improved scoring system, termed "integrated" lung ultrasound score (i-LUS) which incorporates previously mentioned parameters that can help in prediction of disease severity and survival, choice of oxygenation mode/ventilation and assignment to subsequent areas of care in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.MethodsUpon admission at the sub-intensive section of the emergency medical department (SEMD), 143 consecutively examined COVID-19 patients underwent i-LUS together with all other routine analysis. A database for anamnestic information, laboratory data, gas analysis and i-LUS parameters was created and analyzed.ResultsOf 143 enrolled patients, 59.4% were male (mean age 71 years) and 40.6% female. (mean age 79 years: p = 0.005). Patients that survived at 1 month had i-LUS score of 16, which was lower than that of non-survivors (median 20; p = 0.005). Survivors had a higher PaO2/FiO2 (median 321.5) compared to non-survivors (median 229, p < 0.001). There was a correlation between i-LUS and PaO2/FiO2 ratio (rho:-0.4452; p < 0.001), PaO2/FiO2 and survival status (rho:-0.3452; p < 0.001), as well as i-LUS score and disease outcome (rho:0.24; p = 0.005). In non-survivors, the serum values of different significant COVID indicators were severely expressed. The i-LUS score was higher (median 20) in patients who required non-invasive ventilation (NIV) than in those treated only by oxygen therapy (median 15.42; p = 0.003). The odds ratio for death outcome was 1.08 (confidence interval 1.02-1.15) for each point increased. At 1-month follow-up, 65 patients (45.5%) died and 78 (54.5%) survived. Patients admitted to the high critical ward had higher i-LUS score than those admitted to the low critical one (p < 0.003).Conclusionsi-LUS could be used as a helpful clinical tool for early decision-making in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.

Project description:ObjectivesChest CT has been widely used to screen and to evaluate the severity of COVID-19 disease in the early stages of infection without severe acute respiratory syndrome, but no prospective data are available to study the relationship between extent of lung damage and short-term mortality. The objective was to evaluate association between standardized simple visual lung damage CT score (vldCTs) at admission, which does not require any software, and 30-day mortality.MethodsIn a single-center prospective cohort of COVID-19 patients included during 4 weeks, the presence and extent of ground glass opacities(GGO), consolidation opacities, or both of them were visually assessed in each of the 5 lung lobes (score from 0 to 4 per lobe depending on the percentage and out of 20 per patient = vldCTs) after the first chest CT performed to detect COVID-19 pneumonia.ResultsAmong 210 confirmed COVID-19 patients, the number of survivors and non-survivors was 162 (77%) and 48 (23%), respectively at 30 days. vldCTs was significantly higher in non-survivors, and the AUC of vldCTs to distinguish survivors and non-survivors was 0.72 (95%CI 0.628-0.807, p < 0.001); the best cut-off vldCTs value was 7. During follow-up, significant differences in discharges and 30-day mortality were observed between patients with vldCTs ≥ 7 versus vldCTs < 7: (98 [85.2%] vs 49 [51.6%]; p < 0.001 and 36 [37.9%] vs 12 [12.4%]; p < 0.001, respectively. The 30-day mortality increased if vldCTs ≥ 7 (HR, 3.16 (1.50-6.43); p = 0.001), independent of age, respiratory rate and oxygen saturation levels, and comorbidities at admission.ConclusionsBy using chest CT in COVID-19 patients, extensive lung damage can be visually assessed with a score related to 30-day mortality independent of conventional risk factors of the disease.Key points• In non-selected COVID-19 patients included prospectively during 4 weeks, the extent of ground glass opacities(GGO) and consolidation opacities evaluated by a simple visual score was related to 30-day mortality independent of age, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation levels, comorbidities, and hs-troponin I level at admission. • This severity score should be incorporated into risk stratification algorithms and in structured chest CT reports requiring a standardized reading by radiologists in case of COVID-19.

Project description:Background and aimThe efficacy of Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score as predictor of clinical outcomes among ICU-admitted COVID-19 patients is still controversial. We aimed to assess whether SOFA-score in different time intervals could predict 28-day mortality compared with other well-acknowledged risk factors of COVID-19 mortality.MethodsThis observational prospective cohort was conducted on 1057 patients from March 2020 to March 2022 at Masih Daneshvari Hospital, Iran. The univariate and multivariate Cox proportional analysis were performed to assess the hazards of SOFA-score models. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were designed to estimate the predictive values.ResultsMean SOFA-score during first 96 h (HR: 3.82 [CI: 2.75-5.31]), highest SOFA-score (HR: 2.70 [CI: 1.93-3.78]), and initial SOFA-score (HR: 1.65 [CI: 1.30-2.11]) had strongest association with 28-day mortality (p < .0001). In contrast, SOFA scores at 48 and 96 h as well as Δ-SOFA: 48-0 h and Δ-SOFA: 96-0 h did not show significant correlations. Among them, merely mean SOFA-score (HR: 2.28 [CI: 2.21-3.51]; p < .001) remained as independent prognosticator on multivariate regression analysis; though having less odds of predicting value compared with age (HR: 3.81 [CI: 1.98-5.21]), hypertension (HR: 3.11 [CI: 1.26-3.81]), coronary artery disease [CAD] (HR: 2.82 [CI: 1.51-4.8]), and diabetes mellitus (HR: 2.45 [CI: 1.36-2.99]). The area under ROC (AUROC) for mean SOFA-score (0.77) and highest SOFA-score (0.71) were larger than other SOFA intervals. Calculating the first 96 h of SOFA trends, it was obtained that fatality rate was <12.3% if the score dropped, between 28.8% and 46.29% if the score remained unchanged, and >50.45% if the score increased.ConclusionTo predict the 28-day mortality among ICU-admitted COVID-19 patients, mean SOFA upon first 96 h of ICU stay is reliable; while having inadequate accuracy comparing with well-acknowledged COVID-19 mortality predictors (age, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, CAD). Notably, increased SOFA levels in the course of first 96 h of ICU-admission, prognosticate at least 50% fatality regardless of initial SOFA score.

Dataset Information

Lung Ultrasound Score as a Predictor of Mortality in Patients With COVID-19.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets