肺部超声波与胸部 X 光检查在检测新生儿重症监护室早产儿肺部合并症和水肿方面的功效。

IF 3.1 4区 医学 Q1 Medicine
Lin Niu, Zhi-Qun Zhang, Jing Li, Min Zhao
{"title":"肺部超声波与胸部 X 光检查在检测新生儿重症监护室早产儿肺部合并症和水肿方面的功效。","authors":"Lin Niu, Zhi-Qun Zhang, Jing Li, Min Zhao","doi":"10.12659/MSM.944426","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BACKGROUND The incidence of lung diseases in premature newborns is significantly higher than in full-term newborns due to their underdeveloped lungs. Ultrasound and X-ray are commonly-used bedside examinations in neonatology. This study primarily compares the efficacy of chest X-ray (CXR) and lung ultrasound (LUS) images in evaluating lung consolidation and edema in premature newborns at Neonatal Intensive Care Units (NICU). MATERIAL AND METHODS A retrospective analysis was conducted on LUS and CXR examination results, along with clinical records of premature newborns admitted to our hospital's NICU from November 1, 2019, to December 31, 2021. CXR and LUS scans were performed on the same newborn within a day. We evaluated the consolidations and edema by interpreting the CXR and LUS images, then compared the findings. RESULTS Out of 75 cases, 34 showed lung consolidations on LUS (45%), while only 14 exhibited consolidations on CXR (19%). The detection rate of consolidations by LUS was significantly higher compared to CXR (34/75 vs 14/75, P<0.001). Differences were observed between the 2 bedside examinations in identifying consolidations, with some cases seen only on LUS. CXR struggled to accurately assess the severity of lung edema visible on LUS, showing significant disparity in detecting interstitial edema (53/75 vs 21/75, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS LUS outperforms chest CXR for bedside assessment of lung consolidation and edema in premature newborns.</p>","PeriodicalId":48888,"journal":{"name":"Medical Science Monitor","volume":"30 ","pages":"e944426"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11395904/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of Lung Ultrasound vs Chest X-Ray in Detecting Lung Consolidation and Edema in Premature Infants in the NICU.\",\"authors\":\"Lin Niu, Zhi-Qun Zhang, Jing Li, Min Zhao\",\"doi\":\"10.12659/MSM.944426\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>BACKGROUND The incidence of lung diseases in premature newborns is significantly higher than in full-term newborns due to their underdeveloped lungs. Ultrasound and X-ray are commonly-used bedside examinations in neonatology. This study primarily compares the efficacy of chest X-ray (CXR) and lung ultrasound (LUS) images in evaluating lung consolidation and edema in premature newborns at Neonatal Intensive Care Units (NICU). MATERIAL AND METHODS A retrospective analysis was conducted on LUS and CXR examination results, along with clinical records of premature newborns admitted to our hospital's NICU from November 1, 2019, to December 31, 2021. CXR and LUS scans were performed on the same newborn within a day. We evaluated the consolidations and edema by interpreting the CXR and LUS images, then compared the findings. RESULTS Out of 75 cases, 34 showed lung consolidations on LUS (45%), while only 14 exhibited consolidations on CXR (19%). The detection rate of consolidations by LUS was significantly higher compared to CXR (34/75 vs 14/75, P<0.001). Differences were observed between the 2 bedside examinations in identifying consolidations, with some cases seen only on LUS. CXR struggled to accurately assess the severity of lung edema visible on LUS, showing significant disparity in detecting interstitial edema (53/75 vs 21/75, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS LUS outperforms chest CXR for bedside assessment of lung consolidation and edema in premature newborns.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48888,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Science Monitor\",\"volume\":\"30 \",\"pages\":\"e944426\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11395904/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Science Monitor\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12659/MSM.944426\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Science Monitor","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12659/MSM.944426","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景 早产新生儿由于肺部发育不全,肺部疾病的发病率明显高于足月新生儿。超声波和 X 光是新生儿科常用的床边检查方法。本研究主要比较胸部 X 光(CXR)和肺部超声(LUS)图像在评估新生儿重症监护室(NICU)早产新生儿肺部合并症和水肿方面的功效。材料与方法 对我院新生儿重症监护室 2019 年 11 月 1 日至 2021 年 12 月 31 日收治的早产新生儿的 LUS 和 CXR 检查结果以及临床记录进行了回顾性分析。CXR和LUS扫描是在一天内对同一新生儿进行的。我们通过判读 CXR 和 LUS 图像对合并症和水肿进行评估,然后对结果进行比较。结果 在 75 个病例中,有 34 个病例在 LUS 上显示肺部合并症(45%),而只有 14 个病例在 CXR 上显示合并症(19%)。与 CXR 相比,LUS 对肺部合并症的检出率明显更高(34/75 vs 14/75,P
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Efficacy of Lung Ultrasound vs Chest X-Ray in Detecting Lung Consolidation and Edema in Premature Infants in the NICU.

BACKGROUND The incidence of lung diseases in premature newborns is significantly higher than in full-term newborns due to their underdeveloped lungs. Ultrasound and X-ray are commonly-used bedside examinations in neonatology. This study primarily compares the efficacy of chest X-ray (CXR) and lung ultrasound (LUS) images in evaluating lung consolidation and edema in premature newborns at Neonatal Intensive Care Units (NICU). MATERIAL AND METHODS A retrospective analysis was conducted on LUS and CXR examination results, along with clinical records of premature newborns admitted to our hospital's NICU from November 1, 2019, to December 31, 2021. CXR and LUS scans were performed on the same newborn within a day. We evaluated the consolidations and edema by interpreting the CXR and LUS images, then compared the findings. RESULTS Out of 75 cases, 34 showed lung consolidations on LUS (45%), while only 14 exhibited consolidations on CXR (19%). The detection rate of consolidations by LUS was significantly higher compared to CXR (34/75 vs 14/75, P<0.001). Differences were observed between the 2 bedside examinations in identifying consolidations, with some cases seen only on LUS. CXR struggled to accurately assess the severity of lung edema visible on LUS, showing significant disparity in detecting interstitial edema (53/75 vs 21/75, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS LUS outperforms chest CXR for bedside assessment of lung consolidation and edema in premature newborns.

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
Medical Science Monitor
Medical Science Monitor MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
3.20%
发文量
514
审稿时长
3.0 months
期刊介绍: Medical Science Monitor (MSM) established in 1995 is an international, peer-reviewed scientific journal which publishes original articles in Clinical Medicine and related disciplines such as Epidemiology and Population Studies, Product Investigations, Development of Laboratory Techniques :: Diagnostics and Medical Technology which enable presentation of research or review works in overlapping areas of medicine and technology such us (but not limited to): medical diagnostics, medical imaging systems, computer simulation of health and disease processes, new medical devices, etc. Reviews and Special Reports - papers may be accepted on the basis that they provide a systematic, critical and up-to-date overview of literature pertaining to research or clinical topics. Meta-analyses are considered as reviews. A special attention will be paid to a teaching value of a review paper. Medical Science Monitor is internationally indexed in Thomson-Reuters Web of Science, Journals Citation Report (JCR), Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI), Index Medicus MEDLINE, PubMed, PMC, EMBASE/Excerpta Medica, Chemical Abstracts CAS and Index Copernicus.
×
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