Comparison of sensitivity of lung ultrasound and chest x-ray imaging for the diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia in children

V. Berce
{"title":"Comparison of sensitivity of lung ultrasound and chest x-ray imaging for the diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia in children","authors":"V. Berce","doi":"10.18690/actabiomed.167","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Lung ultrasound (LUS) has only recently been considered to be a suitable tool for diagnosing community acquired pneumonia (CAP) in children. Little is known about the usefulness of LUS in different types of pneumonia. Therefore, we analyzed and compared the sensitivity of chest X-ray (CXR) and LUS in different etiological types of CAP in children. \nMethods: We performed a prospective study in 166 children with CAP, who were admitted to the hospital. The participants were stratified into bacterial (n=80), atypical bacterial (n=32) and viral (n=54) pneumonia subgroups, according to the laboratory and microbiological results. LUS and CXR were performed on all patients at admission. \nResults: Pneumonia was detected with LUS in 161 (97.0%) participants and with CXR in 137 (82.5%) participants (p<0.01). The sensitivity of LUS was calculated as 97.0% (95% CI, 93.1%–99.0%), and the sensitivity of CXR as 82.5% (95% CI, 75.9%– 88.0%), p<0.01. In patients with bacterial CAP, infiltrates were detected with LUS in 79 (98.7%) and with CXR in 67 (83.8%) of cases (p<0.01); in atypical bacterial CAP, with LUS in 30 (93.8%) and with CXR in 28 (87.5%) (p=0.69); and in patients with viral CAP with LUS in 52 (96.3%) and with CXR in 42 (77.8%) (p<0.01). \nConclusion: We have determined that LUS is an excellent tool for diagnosing CAP in children. LUS is at least as sensitive as CXR in all types of CAP in children and will probably replace it as the investigation of choice in CAP.","PeriodicalId":186880,"journal":{"name":"Acta Medico-Biotechnica","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Medico-Biotechnica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18690/actabiomed.167","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Lung ultrasound (LUS) has only recently been considered to be a suitable tool for diagnosing community acquired pneumonia (CAP) in children. Little is known about the usefulness of LUS in different types of pneumonia. Therefore, we analyzed and compared the sensitivity of chest X-ray (CXR) and LUS in different etiological types of CAP in children. Methods: We performed a prospective study in 166 children with CAP, who were admitted to the hospital. The participants were stratified into bacterial (n=80), atypical bacterial (n=32) and viral (n=54) pneumonia subgroups, according to the laboratory and microbiological results. LUS and CXR were performed on all patients at admission. Results: Pneumonia was detected with LUS in 161 (97.0%) participants and with CXR in 137 (82.5%) participants (p<0.01). The sensitivity of LUS was calculated as 97.0% (95% CI, 93.1%–99.0%), and the sensitivity of CXR as 82.5% (95% CI, 75.9%– 88.0%), p<0.01. In patients with bacterial CAP, infiltrates were detected with LUS in 79 (98.7%) and with CXR in 67 (83.8%) of cases (p<0.01); in atypical bacterial CAP, with LUS in 30 (93.8%) and with CXR in 28 (87.5%) (p=0.69); and in patients with viral CAP with LUS in 52 (96.3%) and with CXR in 42 (77.8%) (p<0.01). Conclusion: We have determined that LUS is an excellent tool for diagnosing CAP in children. LUS is at least as sensitive as CXR in all types of CAP in children and will probably replace it as the investigation of choice in CAP.
肺超声与胸片诊断儿童社区获得性肺炎的敏感性比较
目的:肺超声(LUS)最近才被认为是诊断儿童社区获得性肺炎(CAP)的合适工具。对于LUS在不同类型肺炎中的作用知之甚少。因此,我们分析比较了不同病因型儿童CAP的胸片(CXR)和LUS的敏感性。方法:我们对入院的166例CAP患儿进行前瞻性研究。根据实验室和微生物学结果,参与者被分为细菌性肺炎(n=80)、非典型细菌性肺炎(n=32)和病毒性肺炎(n=54)亚组。所有患者入院时均行LUS和CXR检查。结果:LUS组有161例(97.0%)检出肺炎,CXR组有137例(82.5%)检出肺炎(p<0.01)。LUS的敏感性为97.0% (95% CI, 93.1% ~ 99.0%), CXR的敏感性为82.5% (95% CI, 75.9% ~ 88.0%), p<0.01。在细菌性CAP患者中,LUS检出浸润79例(98.7%),CXR检出浸润67例(83.8%)(p<0.01);在非典型细菌CAP中,LUS 30例(93.8%),CXR 28例(87.5%)(p=0.69);病毒性CAP合并LUS患者52例(96.3%),合并CXR患者42例(77.8%)(p<0.01)。结论:我们确定LUS是诊断儿童CAP的一个很好的工具。在所有类型的儿童CAP中,LUS至少与CXR一样敏感,并可能取代它作为CAP的选择调查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信