Bedside Lung Ultrasound as an Independent Tool to Diagnose Pneumonia in Comparison to Chest X-ray: An Observational Prospective Study from Intensive Care Units.
{"title":"Bedside Lung Ultrasound as an Independent Tool to Diagnose Pneumonia in Comparison to Chest X-ray: An Observational Prospective Study from Intensive Care Units.","authors":"Jonny Dhawan, Gurpreet Singh","doi":"10.5005/jp-journals-10071-24283","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Diagnosing pneumonia is challenging because of multiple differential diagnosis. Bedside lung ultrasound (BLUS) is a safe, portable, rapid and inexpensive new modality to diagnose pneumonia. This study was aimed to evaluate the sensitivity of BLUS vs chest X-ray (CXR) to diagnose community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) using computed tomography (CT) scans as the gold standard.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>An observational cross-sectional study was conducted in selected intensive care units (ICUs). Eligible 85 adult patients with symptoms suggestive of pneumonia as per 2007 Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA), American Thoracic Society (ATS) criteria, and 2D echocardiography were enrolled consecutively by using convenient sampling technique. Real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay for SARS-associated coronavirus was sent with in 1 hour followed by BLUS and CXR within 24 hours of ICU admission. The final confirmation of CAP was done by a thoracic CT scan.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Bedside lung ultrasound vs CXR could detect 74 vs 58 cases out of 84 confirmed cases. Sensitivity and specificity of BLUS vs CXR was 88.1% vs 67.8% and 100% vs 0%, respectively. Moreover, LR+ and LR- for BLUS was found to be 0 and 0.12 in comparison to 0.68 and 0 for CXR. The area under receiver operator characteristics (ROC) curve for BLUS vs CXR was 0.94 (95% CI 0.0-1.0) with <i>p</i> = 0.13 and 0.66 (95% CI 0.12-1.0) with <i>p</i> = 0.58. There was a significant agreement between diagnostic accuracy of BLUS and CT scan [kappa value (κ) = 0.14, <i>p</i> = 0.009], whereas CXR could not establish its diagnostic efficiency (κ = -0.023, <i>p</i> = 0.493). Sonographic features of pneumonia were B-lines, shred, and hepatization signs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>It is observed that BLUS showed higher sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy as compared to CXR to diagnose pneumonia.</p><p><strong>How to cite this article: </strong>Dhawan J, Singh G. Bedside Lung Ultrasound as an Independent Tool to Diagnose Pneumonia in Comparison to Chest X-ray: An Observational Prospective Study from Intensive Care Units. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(8):920-929.</p>","PeriodicalId":520643,"journal":{"name":"Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"920-929"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/05/9b/ijccm-26-920.PMC9363808.pdf","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10071-24283","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Abstract
Background: Diagnosing pneumonia is challenging because of multiple differential diagnosis. Bedside lung ultrasound (BLUS) is a safe, portable, rapid and inexpensive new modality to diagnose pneumonia. This study was aimed to evaluate the sensitivity of BLUS vs chest X-ray (CXR) to diagnose community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) using computed tomography (CT) scans as the gold standard.
Patients and methods: An observational cross-sectional study was conducted in selected intensive care units (ICUs). Eligible 85 adult patients with symptoms suggestive of pneumonia as per 2007 Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA), American Thoracic Society (ATS) criteria, and 2D echocardiography were enrolled consecutively by using convenient sampling technique. Real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay for SARS-associated coronavirus was sent with in 1 hour followed by BLUS and CXR within 24 hours of ICU admission. The final confirmation of CAP was done by a thoracic CT scan.
Results: Bedside lung ultrasound vs CXR could detect 74 vs 58 cases out of 84 confirmed cases. Sensitivity and specificity of BLUS vs CXR was 88.1% vs 67.8% and 100% vs 0%, respectively. Moreover, LR+ and LR- for BLUS was found to be 0 and 0.12 in comparison to 0.68 and 0 for CXR. The area under receiver operator characteristics (ROC) curve for BLUS vs CXR was 0.94 (95% CI 0.0-1.0) with p = 0.13 and 0.66 (95% CI 0.12-1.0) with p = 0.58. There was a significant agreement between diagnostic accuracy of BLUS and CT scan [kappa value (κ) = 0.14, p = 0.009], whereas CXR could not establish its diagnostic efficiency (κ = -0.023, p = 0.493). Sonographic features of pneumonia were B-lines, shred, and hepatization signs.
Conclusion: It is observed that BLUS showed higher sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy as compared to CXR to diagnose pneumonia.
How to cite this article: Dhawan J, Singh G. Bedside Lung Ultrasound as an Independent Tool to Diagnose Pneumonia in Comparison to Chest X-ray: An Observational Prospective Study from Intensive Care Units. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(8):920-929.
背景:由于多种鉴别诊断,肺炎的诊断具有挑战性。床边肺超声(BLUS)是一种安全、便携、快速、廉价的肺炎诊断新方法。本研究旨在评价BLUS与胸部x线(CXR)诊断社区获得性肺炎(CAP)的敏感性,以计算机断层扫描(CT)扫描为金标准。患者和方法:在选定的重症监护病房(icu)进行了一项观察性横断面研究。采用方便抽样技术,连续入组85例符合2007年美国传染病学会(IDSA)、美国胸科学会(ATS)标准和二维超声心动图诊断的有肺炎症状的成年患者。入院1小时内进行实时逆转录聚合酶链反应(RT-PCR)检测,24小时内进行BLUS和CXR检测。最后通过胸部CT扫描确认CAP。结果:84例确诊病例中,床边超声与CXR分别检出率为74例和58例。BLUS对CXR的敏感性和特异性分别为88.1%对67.8%和100%对0%。BLUS的LR+和LR-分别为0和0.12,而CXR的LR+和LR-分别为0.68和0。BLUS与CXR的受试者操作符特征(ROC)曲线下面积分别为0.94 (95% CI 0.0-1.0)和0.66 (95% CI 0.12-1.0), p = 0.13和0.58。BLUS与CT扫描的诊断准确率有显著性一致性[κ值(κ) = 0.14, p = 0.009],而CXR无法建立其诊断效率(κ = -0.023, p = 0.493)。肺炎的声像图表现为b线、碎裂和肝化征象。结论:与CXR相比,BLUS对肺炎的诊断具有更高的敏感性、特异性和诊断准确性。Dhawan J, Singh G.床边肺超声作为诊断肺炎的独立工具与胸部x线相比:一项来自重症监护病房的观察性前瞻性研究。中华检验医学杂志;2009;26(8):920-929。