Feasibility of ultraportable US in detecting clinically concerning recurrent pneumothorax in patients with chest trauma.

IF 2.1 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open Pub Date : 2024-12-31 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1136/tsaco-2024-001464
Abdul Hafiz Al Tannir, Courtney Pokrzywa, Patrick B Murphy, Elise A Biesboer, Juan Figueroa, Basil S Karam, Marc DeMoya, Thomas Carver
{"title":"Feasibility of ultraportable US in detecting clinically concerning recurrent pneumothorax in patients with chest trauma.","authors":"Abdul Hafiz Al Tannir, Courtney Pokrzywa, Patrick B Murphy, Elise A Biesboer, Juan Figueroa, Basil S Karam, Marc DeMoya, Thomas Carver","doi":"10.1136/tsaco-2024-001464","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Bedside thoracic ultrasound (US) offers numerous advantages over chest X-ray (CXR) for identification of recurrent pneumothoraces (PTX) after tube thoracostomy (TT) removal. Technologic advancements have led to the development of hand-held devices capable of producing high-quality images termed ultra-portable US (UPUS). We hypothesized that UPUS would be as successful as CXR in detecting post-TT removal PTX and would be preferred by patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a single-center prospective, feasibility, study at a level I trauma center investigating the use of UPUS in patients with trauma with TT placement. UPUS images were obtained daily while the TT was in place and post-TT removal (ranging from 1 through 6 hours). A clinically concerning PTX on UPUS was defined as the absence of lung sliding on two or more intercostal spaces. Poststudy Likert surveys were administered to assess patient preferences.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ninety-two patients were included in the analysis. The majority were men (87%), and the median age was 47 years. Thirty-five patients (36%) had discordant imaging findings. There were 11 clinically concerning PTX, of which 10 (91%) were detected on UPUS and 8 (73%) on CXR. Three patients required an intervention for post-pull PTX, all of whom were identified on UPUS. Eighty-four percent (N=70) of surveyed patients preferred UPUS over CXR with 92% reporting no discomfort with UPUS compared with 49% with CXR.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Bedside UPUS is preferred by patients and can successfully identify clinically concerning post-TT removal PTX. Implementation of UPUS as a post-TT removal diagnostic tool is a safe and effective alternative to CXR.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level II, diagnostic tests or criteria.</p>","PeriodicalId":23307,"journal":{"name":"Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open","volume":"9 1","pages":"e001464"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11749396/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/tsaco-2024-001464","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Bedside thoracic ultrasound (US) offers numerous advantages over chest X-ray (CXR) for identification of recurrent pneumothoraces (PTX) after tube thoracostomy (TT) removal. Technologic advancements have led to the development of hand-held devices capable of producing high-quality images termed ultra-portable US (UPUS). We hypothesized that UPUS would be as successful as CXR in detecting post-TT removal PTX and would be preferred by patients.

Methods: We conducted a single-center prospective, feasibility, study at a level I trauma center investigating the use of UPUS in patients with trauma with TT placement. UPUS images were obtained daily while the TT was in place and post-TT removal (ranging from 1 through 6 hours). A clinically concerning PTX on UPUS was defined as the absence of lung sliding on two or more intercostal spaces. Poststudy Likert surveys were administered to assess patient preferences.

Results: Ninety-two patients were included in the analysis. The majority were men (87%), and the median age was 47 years. Thirty-five patients (36%) had discordant imaging findings. There were 11 clinically concerning PTX, of which 10 (91%) were detected on UPUS and 8 (73%) on CXR. Three patients required an intervention for post-pull PTX, all of whom were identified on UPUS. Eighty-four percent (N=70) of surveyed patients preferred UPUS over CXR with 92% reporting no discomfort with UPUS compared with 49% with CXR.

Conclusion: Bedside UPUS is preferred by patients and can successfully identify clinically concerning post-TT removal PTX. Implementation of UPUS as a post-TT removal diagnostic tool is a safe and effective alternative to CXR.

Level of evidence: Level II, diagnostic tests or criteria.

超便携超声检测胸外伤患者复发性气胸的临床可行性。
背景:胸旁超声(US)在诊断胸腔插管(TT)术后复发性气胸(PTX)方面比x线胸片(CXR)有许多优势。技术的进步导致了能够产生高质量图像的手持设备的发展,称为超便携式美国(UPUS)。我们假设UPUS在检测tt术后PTX方面与CXR一样成功,并且会受到患者的青睐。方法:我们在一家一级创伤中心进行了一项单中心前瞻性、可行性研究,调查UPUS在创伤放置TT患者中的应用。在TT放置期间和TT移除后(1至6小时)每天获取UPUS图像。临床上关注UPUS的PTX被定义为肺在两个或多个肋间隙上没有滑动。研究后进行李克特调查以评估患者的偏好。结果:92例患者纳入分析。大多数为男性(87%),中位年龄为47岁。35例(36%)患者影像学表现不一致。临床有PTX 11例,其中UPUS检出10例(91%),CXR检出8例(73%)。3例患者需要对牵拉后PTX进行干预,所有患者均在UPUS上被识别。84% (N=70)的受访患者更喜欢UPUS而不是CXR, 92%的患者报告UPUS没有不适,而CXR则为49%。结论:床边UPUS是患者的首选,可以成功识别临床tt术后PTX。UPUS作为tt后切除诊断工具的实施是CXR安全有效的替代方案。证据级别:II级,诊断测试或标准。
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
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
5.00%
发文量
71
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信