Cargando…

Utility of lung ultrasound to identify interstitial lung disease: An observational study based on the STROBE guidelines

Lung ultrasound (LUS) has recently been used to identify interstitial lung disease (ILD). However, data on the role of LUS in the detection of ILD remain limited. The aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic value of LUS compared with high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) in patients...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yan, Jun-Hong, Pan, Lei, Gao, Yan-Bing, Cui, Guang-He, Wang, Yue-Heng
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9282064/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33761708
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000025217
_version_ 1784747025358651392
author Yan, Jun-Hong
Pan, Lei
Gao, Yan-Bing
Cui, Guang-He
Wang, Yue-Heng
author_facet Yan, Jun-Hong
Pan, Lei
Gao, Yan-Bing
Cui, Guang-He
Wang, Yue-Heng
author_sort Yan, Jun-Hong
collection PubMed
description Lung ultrasound (LUS) has recently been used to identify interstitial lung disease (ILD). However, data on the role of LUS in the detection of ILD remain limited. The aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic value of LUS compared with high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) in patients with ILD. The retrospective study was carried out by reviewing the medical records of patients with respiratory signs and symptoms discharged from the respiratory ward. Only patients with suspected ILD who underwent HRCT and LUS within a week were selected. ILD was identified with a semi-quantitative score of B-lines >5 and a Warrick score >0 points. The endpoints of LUS in diagnosing ILD (i.e., sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio [PLR], negative likelihood ratio [NLR], positive predictive value [PPV], and negative predictive value [NPV], and receiver operating characteristic [ROC] curve) was compared with that of HRCT. The reference standard used for the diagnosis of ILD was based on history, clinical findings and examination, and laboratory and instrumental tests, including pulmonary function tests, lung histopathology, and HRCT (without LUS findings). The final clinical diagnosis of ILD was 55 in 66 patients with suspected ILD. HRCT was positive in 55 patients, whereas LUS detected ILD in 51 patients. Four patients with negative LUS findings were positive on HRCT. The results showed 93% sensitivity, 73% specificity, 3.40 PLR, 0.10 NLR, 94% PPV, and 67% NPV for LUS, whereas 100% sensitivity, 82% specificity, 5.49 PLR, 0.01 NLR, 97% PPV, and 100% NPV for HRCT. Comparison of the 2 ROC curves revealed significant difference in the diagnostic value of the 2 methods for the diagnosis of ILD (P = .048). Our results indicated that LUS is a useful technique to identify ILD. Considering its non-radiation, portable and non-invasive advantages, LUS should be recommended as a valuable screening tool in patients with suspected ILD.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9282064
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92820642022-08-02 Utility of lung ultrasound to identify interstitial lung disease: An observational study based on the STROBE guidelines Yan, Jun-Hong Pan, Lei Gao, Yan-Bing Cui, Guang-He Wang, Yue-Heng Medicine (Baltimore) 6700 Lung ultrasound (LUS) has recently been used to identify interstitial lung disease (ILD). However, data on the role of LUS in the detection of ILD remain limited. The aim of this study was to investigate the diagnostic value of LUS compared with high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) in patients with ILD. The retrospective study was carried out by reviewing the medical records of patients with respiratory signs and symptoms discharged from the respiratory ward. Only patients with suspected ILD who underwent HRCT and LUS within a week were selected. ILD was identified with a semi-quantitative score of B-lines >5 and a Warrick score >0 points. The endpoints of LUS in diagnosing ILD (i.e., sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio [PLR], negative likelihood ratio [NLR], positive predictive value [PPV], and negative predictive value [NPV], and receiver operating characteristic [ROC] curve) was compared with that of HRCT. The reference standard used for the diagnosis of ILD was based on history, clinical findings and examination, and laboratory and instrumental tests, including pulmonary function tests, lung histopathology, and HRCT (without LUS findings). The final clinical diagnosis of ILD was 55 in 66 patients with suspected ILD. HRCT was positive in 55 patients, whereas LUS detected ILD in 51 patients. Four patients with negative LUS findings were positive on HRCT. The results showed 93% sensitivity, 73% specificity, 3.40 PLR, 0.10 NLR, 94% PPV, and 67% NPV for LUS, whereas 100% sensitivity, 82% specificity, 5.49 PLR, 0.01 NLR, 97% PPV, and 100% NPV for HRCT. Comparison of the 2 ROC curves revealed significant difference in the diagnostic value of the 2 methods for the diagnosis of ILD (P = .048). Our results indicated that LUS is a useful technique to identify ILD. Considering its non-radiation, portable and non-invasive advantages, LUS should be recommended as a valuable screening tool in patients with suspected ILD. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021-03-26 /pmc/articles/PMC9282064/ /pubmed/33761708 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000025217 Text en Copyright © 2021 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial License 4.0 (CCBY-NC), where it is permissible to download, share, remix, transform, and buildup the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)
spellingShingle 6700
Yan, Jun-Hong
Pan, Lei
Gao, Yan-Bing
Cui, Guang-He
Wang, Yue-Heng
Utility of lung ultrasound to identify interstitial lung disease: An observational study based on the STROBE guidelines
title Utility of lung ultrasound to identify interstitial lung disease: An observational study based on the STROBE guidelines
title_full Utility of lung ultrasound to identify interstitial lung disease: An observational study based on the STROBE guidelines
title_fullStr Utility of lung ultrasound to identify interstitial lung disease: An observational study based on the STROBE guidelines
title_full_unstemmed Utility of lung ultrasound to identify interstitial lung disease: An observational study based on the STROBE guidelines
title_short Utility of lung ultrasound to identify interstitial lung disease: An observational study based on the STROBE guidelines
title_sort utility of lung ultrasound to identify interstitial lung disease: an observational study based on the strobe guidelines
topic 6700
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9282064/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33761708
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000025217
work_keys_str_mv AT yanjunhong utilityoflungultrasoundtoidentifyinterstitiallungdiseaseanobservationalstudybasedonthestrobeguidelines
AT panlei utilityoflungultrasoundtoidentifyinterstitiallungdiseaseanobservationalstudybasedonthestrobeguidelines
AT gaoyanbing utilityoflungultrasoundtoidentifyinterstitiallungdiseaseanobservationalstudybasedonthestrobeguidelines
AT cuiguanghe utilityoflungultrasoundtoidentifyinterstitiallungdiseaseanobservationalstudybasedonthestrobeguidelines
AT wangyueheng utilityoflungultrasoundtoidentifyinterstitiallungdiseaseanobservationalstudybasedonthestrobeguidelines