Cargando…

Lung Ultrasound versus Chest X-ray for the Diagnosis of COVID-19 Pneumonia

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to compare point-of-care lung ultrasound (LUS) with chest x-ray (CXR) to determine which is the more accurate diagnostic imaging modality for COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: This was a single-center, prospective, observational IRB-approved study at an urban un...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Goett, Harry J., Murrett, James, Patterson, Jessica, Mendez, Kendra, Magee, Mark, Tyner, Nicholas, Gibbons, Ryan C., Costantino, Thomas G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Published by Elsevier Inc. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10069989/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jemermed.2023.03.002
_version_ 1785018947576266752
author Goett, Harry J.
Murrett, James
Patterson, Jessica
Mendez, Kendra
Magee, Mark
Tyner, Nicholas
Gibbons, Ryan C.
Costantino, Thomas G.
author_facet Goett, Harry J.
Murrett, James
Patterson, Jessica
Mendez, Kendra
Magee, Mark
Tyner, Nicholas
Gibbons, Ryan C.
Costantino, Thomas G.
author_sort Goett, Harry J.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to compare point-of-care lung ultrasound (LUS) with chest x-ray (CXR) to determine which is the more accurate diagnostic imaging modality for COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: This was a single-center, prospective, observational IRB-approved study at an urban university hospital with >105,000 patient visits annually. Patients >18 years old, who presented to the emergency department with signs and symptoms of COVID-19, were eligible for enrollment. Each patient received a LUS, performed by an emergency medicine resident or attending physician, using a portable, handheld ultrasound followed by a portable anteroposterior CXR. High risk patients or those with an abnormal imaging finding underwent a non-contrast-enhanced computed tomography (NCCT) as the diagnostic standard. The primary outcome was the sensitivity and specificity of LUS and of CXR at identifying COVID-19 pneumonia against NCCT as the reference standard. Using a power analysis of 80%, our sample size calculation of 98 patients was based on previous data demonstrating a 20% difference in sensitivities between LUS and CXR at diagnosing viral pneumonia. Data are presented as proportions with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Data analysis included the chi-square and t tests. BACKGROUND: The viral illness, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), commonly known as coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19), has become a global pandemic infecting over 400 million individuals worldwide. Often symptoms are vague, and physical exam findings have proven unreliable as indicators of infection. Therefore, diagnosis typically relies on imaging or nasopharyngeal swabs. RESULTS: 143 consecutive patients with signs and symptoms of COVID-19 were approached and enrolled. 27 patients were considered low risk by the attending EP per emergency department guidelines, and 6 patients were admitted for alternate diagnoses without advanced imaging. 110 patients underwent LUS, CXR, and NCCT. 99 LUS and 73 CXRs were interpreted as positive. 81 NCCT were interpreted as positive providing a prevalence of COVID-19 pneumonia of 75% (95% CI 66.0-83.2) in our study population. Sensitivity of LUS was 97.6% (95% CI 91.6-99.7) vs 69.9% (95% CI 58.8-79.5) for CXR. Specificity was 33.3% (95% CI 16.5-54.0) for LUS and 44.4% (95% CI 25.5-64.7) for CXR. LUS positive and negative likelihood ratios were 1.46 (95% CI 1.12-1.92) and 0.0723 (95% CI 0.01-0.31), respectively vs 1.26 (95% CI 0.87-1.81) and 0.67 (95% CI 0.39-1.16) for CXR. PPV and NPV for LUS were 81.8% (95% CI 72.8-88.9) and 81.8% (95% CI 48.2-97.7) compared to 79.5% (95% CI 68.4-88.0) and 32.4% (95% CI 18.0-49.8) for CXR. CONCLUSION: LUS was more sensitive than CXR at identifying COVID-19 pneumonia radiographically. LUS using a portable, handheld ultrasound can be a valuable triage screening modality for patients with suspected COVID-19 pneumonia in diverse clinical settings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10069989
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Published by Elsevier Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100699892023-04-04 Lung Ultrasound versus Chest X-ray for the Diagnosis of COVID-19 Pneumonia Goett, Harry J. Murrett, James Patterson, Jessica Mendez, Kendra Magee, Mark Tyner, Nicholas Gibbons, Ryan C. Costantino, Thomas G. J Emerg Med Article OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to compare point-of-care lung ultrasound (LUS) with chest x-ray (CXR) to determine which is the more accurate diagnostic imaging modality for COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: This was a single-center, prospective, observational IRB-approved study at an urban university hospital with >105,000 patient visits annually. Patients >18 years old, who presented to the emergency department with signs and symptoms of COVID-19, were eligible for enrollment. Each patient received a LUS, performed by an emergency medicine resident or attending physician, using a portable, handheld ultrasound followed by a portable anteroposterior CXR. High risk patients or those with an abnormal imaging finding underwent a non-contrast-enhanced computed tomography (NCCT) as the diagnostic standard. The primary outcome was the sensitivity and specificity of LUS and of CXR at identifying COVID-19 pneumonia against NCCT as the reference standard. Using a power analysis of 80%, our sample size calculation of 98 patients was based on previous data demonstrating a 20% difference in sensitivities between LUS and CXR at diagnosing viral pneumonia. Data are presented as proportions with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Data analysis included the chi-square and t tests. BACKGROUND: The viral illness, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), commonly known as coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19), has become a global pandemic infecting over 400 million individuals worldwide. Often symptoms are vague, and physical exam findings have proven unreliable as indicators of infection. Therefore, diagnosis typically relies on imaging or nasopharyngeal swabs. RESULTS: 143 consecutive patients with signs and symptoms of COVID-19 were approached and enrolled. 27 patients were considered low risk by the attending EP per emergency department guidelines, and 6 patients were admitted for alternate diagnoses without advanced imaging. 110 patients underwent LUS, CXR, and NCCT. 99 LUS and 73 CXRs were interpreted as positive. 81 NCCT were interpreted as positive providing a prevalence of COVID-19 pneumonia of 75% (95% CI 66.0-83.2) in our study population. Sensitivity of LUS was 97.6% (95% CI 91.6-99.7) vs 69.9% (95% CI 58.8-79.5) for CXR. Specificity was 33.3% (95% CI 16.5-54.0) for LUS and 44.4% (95% CI 25.5-64.7) for CXR. LUS positive and negative likelihood ratios were 1.46 (95% CI 1.12-1.92) and 0.0723 (95% CI 0.01-0.31), respectively vs 1.26 (95% CI 0.87-1.81) and 0.67 (95% CI 0.39-1.16) for CXR. PPV and NPV for LUS were 81.8% (95% CI 72.8-88.9) and 81.8% (95% CI 48.2-97.7) compared to 79.5% (95% CI 68.4-88.0) and 32.4% (95% CI 18.0-49.8) for CXR. CONCLUSION: LUS was more sensitive than CXR at identifying COVID-19 pneumonia radiographically. LUS using a portable, handheld ultrasound can be a valuable triage screening modality for patients with suspected COVID-19 pneumonia in diverse clinical settings. Published by Elsevier Inc. 2023-03 2023-04-04 /pmc/articles/PMC10069989/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jemermed.2023.03.002 Text en Copyright © 2023 Published by Elsevier Inc. Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.
spellingShingle Article
Goett, Harry J.
Murrett, James
Patterson, Jessica
Mendez, Kendra
Magee, Mark
Tyner, Nicholas
Gibbons, Ryan C.
Costantino, Thomas G.
Lung Ultrasound versus Chest X-ray for the Diagnosis of COVID-19 Pneumonia
title Lung Ultrasound versus Chest X-ray for the Diagnosis of COVID-19 Pneumonia
title_full Lung Ultrasound versus Chest X-ray for the Diagnosis of COVID-19 Pneumonia
title_fullStr Lung Ultrasound versus Chest X-ray for the Diagnosis of COVID-19 Pneumonia
title_full_unstemmed Lung Ultrasound versus Chest X-ray for the Diagnosis of COVID-19 Pneumonia
title_short Lung Ultrasound versus Chest X-ray for the Diagnosis of COVID-19 Pneumonia
title_sort lung ultrasound versus chest x-ray for the diagnosis of covid-19 pneumonia
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10069989/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jemermed.2023.03.002
work_keys_str_mv AT goettharryj lungultrasoundversuschestxrayforthediagnosisofcovid19pneumonia
AT murrettjames lungultrasoundversuschestxrayforthediagnosisofcovid19pneumonia
AT pattersonjessica lungultrasoundversuschestxrayforthediagnosisofcovid19pneumonia
AT mendezkendra lungultrasoundversuschestxrayforthediagnosisofcovid19pneumonia
AT mageemark lungultrasoundversuschestxrayforthediagnosisofcovid19pneumonia
AT tynernicholas lungultrasoundversuschestxrayforthediagnosisofcovid19pneumonia
AT gibbonsryanc lungultrasoundversuschestxrayforthediagnosisofcovid19pneumonia
AT costantinothomasg lungultrasoundversuschestxrayforthediagnosisofcovid19pneumonia