听诊和肺超声在评估麻醉实习医生适当双腔管位置中的诊断准确性-一项单中心前瞻性研究

Jeong-Wook Park, K. Jung, Young Joon Ki, Sang Hun Kim
{"title":"听诊和肺超声在评估麻醉实习医生适当双腔管位置中的诊断准确性-一项单中心前瞻性研究","authors":"Jeong-Wook Park, K. Jung, Young Joon Ki, Sang Hun Kim","doi":"10.30579/mbse.2021.4.2.98","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Lung ultrasound can be used to assess adequate regional ventilation, similar to auscultation. Therefore, we evaluated whether the diagnostic accuracy of lung ultrasound was superior to that of auscultation in the assessment of proper double lumen tube (DLT) position, which were performed by anesthetic trainees. We conducted a single-center, prospective study of 69 patients. DLT insertion, auscultation, lung ultrasound, and fiberoptic bronchoscopy were sequentially conducted in the same patients in the supine and lateral positions. During lung ultrasound, the proper DLT position was defined when the lung pulse and barcode sign were visible on the non-ventilated lung, and lung sliding and seashore sign were observed in the ventilated lung. Fiberoptic bronchoscopy was performed for final verification of the DLT position as a standard test. Contingency tables were plotted to determine accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) for each method. The primary outcome of this study was the accuracy of each method. Accuracy (60.9%), sensitivity (100%), specificity (12.9%), PPV (58.5%), and NPV (100%) of ultrasound were equal to those of auscultation in the supine position. Accuracy (89.9%), sensitivity (100%), specificity (36.4%), PPV (89.2%), and NPV (100%) of ultrasound were equal to that of auscultation in the lateral position. The prevalence of proper lung isolation was 55.1% in the supine position, and it increased to 84.1% in the lateral position. Lung ultrasound is not superior to auscultation for determination of the proper DLT position in both the supine and lateral positions.","PeriodicalId":259565,"journal":{"name":"Medical Biological Science and Engineering","volume":"71 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic accuracy of auscultation and lung ultrasound in the assessment of adequate double lumen tube position for anesthetic trainee doctors - a single center, prospective study\",\"authors\":\"Jeong-Wook Park, K. Jung, Young Joon Ki, Sang Hun Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.30579/mbse.2021.4.2.98\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Lung ultrasound can be used to assess adequate regional ventilation, similar to auscultation. Therefore, we evaluated whether the diagnostic accuracy of lung ultrasound was superior to that of auscultation in the assessment of proper double lumen tube (DLT) position, which were performed by anesthetic trainees. We conducted a single-center, prospective study of 69 patients. DLT insertion, auscultation, lung ultrasound, and fiberoptic bronchoscopy were sequentially conducted in the same patients in the supine and lateral positions. During lung ultrasound, the proper DLT position was defined when the lung pulse and barcode sign were visible on the non-ventilated lung, and lung sliding and seashore sign were observed in the ventilated lung. Fiberoptic bronchoscopy was performed for final verification of the DLT position as a standard test. Contingency tables were plotted to determine accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) for each method. The primary outcome of this study was the accuracy of each method. Accuracy (60.9%), sensitivity (100%), specificity (12.9%), PPV (58.5%), and NPV (100%) of ultrasound were equal to those of auscultation in the supine position. Accuracy (89.9%), sensitivity (100%), specificity (36.4%), PPV (89.2%), and NPV (100%) of ultrasound were equal to that of auscultation in the lateral position. The prevalence of proper lung isolation was 55.1% in the supine position, and it increased to 84.1% in the lateral position. Lung ultrasound is not superior to auscultation for determination of the proper DLT position in both the supine and lateral positions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":259565,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Biological Science and Engineering\",\"volume\":\"71 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Biological Science and Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30579/mbse.2021.4.2.98\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Biological Science and Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30579/mbse.2021.4.2.98","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

肺部超声可用于评估是否足够的局部通气,类似于听诊。因此,我们评估了肺超声在评估双腔管(DLT)正确位置时是否优于听诊的诊断准确性,双腔管是由麻醉实习生进行的。我们对69名患者进行了一项单中心前瞻性研究。在相同的患者中,依次在仰卧位和侧卧位进行DLT插入、听诊、肺超声和纤维支气管镜检查。肺部超声检查时,非通气肺可见肺脉和条形码征象,通气肺可见肺滑动和海滨征象,确定DLT的正确位置。纤维支气管镜检查作为标准检查,用于最终验证DLT位置。绘制列联表以确定每种方法的准确性、敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值(PPV)和阴性预测值(NPV)。本研究的主要结果是每种方法的准确性。超声的准确性(60.9%)、灵敏度(100%)、特异性(12.9%)、PPV(58.5%)、NPV(100%)与仰卧位听诊相同。超声的准确性(89.9%)、灵敏度(100%)、特异性(36.4%)、PPV(89.2%)、NPV(100%)与侧卧位听诊相等。仰卧位正确隔离肺的比例为55.1%,侧卧位为84.1%。无论是仰卧位还是侧卧位,肺超声并不优于听诊来确定DLT的正确位置。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Diagnostic accuracy of auscultation and lung ultrasound in the assessment of adequate double lumen tube position for anesthetic trainee doctors - a single center, prospective study
Lung ultrasound can be used to assess adequate regional ventilation, similar to auscultation. Therefore, we evaluated whether the diagnostic accuracy of lung ultrasound was superior to that of auscultation in the assessment of proper double lumen tube (DLT) position, which were performed by anesthetic trainees. We conducted a single-center, prospective study of 69 patients. DLT insertion, auscultation, lung ultrasound, and fiberoptic bronchoscopy were sequentially conducted in the same patients in the supine and lateral positions. During lung ultrasound, the proper DLT position was defined when the lung pulse and barcode sign were visible on the non-ventilated lung, and lung sliding and seashore sign were observed in the ventilated lung. Fiberoptic bronchoscopy was performed for final verification of the DLT position as a standard test. Contingency tables were plotted to determine accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) for each method. The primary outcome of this study was the accuracy of each method. Accuracy (60.9%), sensitivity (100%), specificity (12.9%), PPV (58.5%), and NPV (100%) of ultrasound were equal to those of auscultation in the supine position. Accuracy (89.9%), sensitivity (100%), specificity (36.4%), PPV (89.2%), and NPV (100%) of ultrasound were equal to that of auscultation in the lateral position. The prevalence of proper lung isolation was 55.1% in the supine position, and it increased to 84.1% in the lateral position. Lung ultrasound is not superior to auscultation for determination of the proper DLT position in both the supine and lateral positions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信