Dataset Information

Lung ultrasound score severity cut-off points in COVID-19 pneumonia. A systematic review and validating cohort.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

Our purpose was to establish different cut-off points based on the lung ultrasound score (LUS) to classify COVID-19 pneumonia severity.

Methods

Initially, we conducted a systematic review among previously proposed LUS cut-off points. Then, these results were validated by a single-centre prospective cohort study of adult patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Studied variables were poor outcome (ventilation support, intensive care unit admission or 28-days mortality) and 28-days mortality.

Results

From 510 articles, 11 articles were included. Among the cut-off points proposed in the articles included, only the LUS>15 cut-off point could be validated for its original endpoint, demonstrating also the strongest relation with poor outcome (odds ratio [OR]=3.636, confidence interval [CI] 1.411-9.374). Regarding our cohort, 127 patients were admitted. In these patients, LUS was statistically associated with poor outcome (OR=1.303, CI 1.137-1.493), and with 28-days mortality (OR=1.024, CI 1.006-1.042). LUS>15 showed the best diagnostic performance when choosing a single cut-off point in our cohort (area under the curve 0.650). LUS≤7 showed high sensitivity to rule out poor outcome (0.89, CI 0.695-0.955), while LUS>20 revealed high specificity to predict poor outcome (0.86, CI 0.776-0.917).

Conclusions

LUS is a good predictor of poor outcome and 28-days mortality in COVID-19. LUS≤7 cut-off point is associated with mild pneumonia, LUS 8-20 with moderate pneumonia and ≥20 with severe pneumonia. If a single cut-off point were used, LUS>15 would be the point which better discriminates mild from severe disease.

SUBMITTER: Gil-Rodriguez J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9998289 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Lung ultrasound score severity cut-off points in COVID-19 pneumonia. A systematic review and validating cohort.

Gil-Rodríguez Jaime J Martos-Ruiz Michel M Benavente-Fernández Alberto A Aranda-Laserna Pablo P Montero-Alonso Miguel Ángel MÁ Peregrina-Rivas José-Antonio JA Fernández-Reyes Daniel D Martínez de Victoria-Carazo Javier J Guirao-Arrabal Emilio E Hernández-Quero José J

Medicina clinica 20230310 12

<h4>Objectives</h4>Our purpose was to establish different cut-off points based on the lung ultrasound score (LUS) to classify COVID-19 pneumonia severity.<h4>Methods</h4>Initially, we conducted a systematic review among previously proposed LUS cut-off points. Then, these results were validated by a single-centre prospective cohort study of adult patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Studied variables were poor outcome (ventilation support, intensive care unit admission or 28-days mortali ...[more]

PMID: 36990898

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Chest imaging, including chest X-ray (CXR) and computed tomography (CT), can be a helpful adjunct to nucleic acid test (NAT) in the diagnosis and management of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Lung point of care ultrasound (POCUS), particularly with handheld devices, is an imaging alternative that is rapid, highly portable, and more accessible in low-resource settings. A standardized POCUS scanning protocol has been proposed to assess the severity of COVID-19 pneumonia, but it has not been sufficiently validated to assess diagnostic accuracy for COVID-19 pneumonia. Purpose: To assess the diagnostic performance of a standardized lung POCUS protocol using a handheld POCUS device to detect patients with either a positive NAT or a COVID-19-typical pattern on CT scan. Methods: Adult inpatients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 and a recent CT were recruited from April to July 2020. Twelve lung zones were scanned with a handheld POCUS machine. Images were reviewed independently by blinded experts and scored according to the proposed protocol. Patients were divided into low, intermediate, and high suspicion based on their POCUS score. Results: Of 79 subjects, 26.6% had a positive NAT and 31.6% had a typical CT pattern. The receiver operator curve for POCUS had an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.787 for positive NAT and 0.820 for a typical CT. Using a two-point cutoff system, POCUS had a sensitivity of 0.90 and 1.00 compared to NAT and typical CT pattern, respectively, at the lower cutoff; it had a specificity of 0.90 and 0.89 compared to NAT and typical CT pattern at the higher cutoff, respectively. Conclusions: The proposed lung POCUS protocol with a handheld device showed reasonable diagnostic performance to detect inpatients with a positive NAT or typical CT pattern for COVID-19. Particularly in low-resource settings, POCUS with handheld devices may serve as a helpful adjunct for persons under investigation for COVID-19 pneumonia.

Project description:PurposeTo investigate the role of lung ultrasound score (LUS) in assessing intubation timing for patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pneumonia.Materials and methodsSeventy-two patients with critical coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were admitted to a makeshift intensive care unit (ICU). All patients underwent bedside lung ultrasonography one to two times per day. The patients were either intubated, treated with noninvasive ventilation (NIV), or given high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) after a discussion with the multidisciplinary group after their conditions worsened. Bedside lung ultrasound was performed daily after intubation, and patients received mechanical ventilation. Lung ultrasound was performed on days 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 after patients were admitted to the ICU; if the patient was intubated, LUS determination was performed before intubation within 24 h (T1) and on days 1, 2, 5, and 7 after intubation (T2, T3, T4, and T5, respectively).The goal of this study was to evaluate the severity of lung aeration loss in intubated and non-intubated patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia by ultrasound at different time points within one week.ResultsA total of 16 patients were included in this study, including nine who were intubated and mechanically ventilated and seven patients without intubation. The number of elderly individuals in the intubated group was higher than in the non-intubated group (P < 0.05). In addition, there were more male than female patients in both groups. Patient characteristics (BMI, SOFA, and PaO2/FiO2 value) were similar between the two groups (P > 0.05). The 28-day mortality rate of intubated patients was higher than that of non-intubated patients; six patients in the intubated group and two patients in the non-intubated group died. Nine intubated patients showed changes in LUS within seven days (n = 9). The mean LUS within 24 h before intubation was 12.8 ± 1.3. LUS was significantly higher on T1 than on T5 (P <0.05), and did not significantly differ from T1 to T4. Comparing LUS between intubated and non-intubated patients on T1 showed that the LUS of intubated patients was significantly higher than that of non-intubated patients (P <0.05). Between the two patient groups, oxygenation index was 140.1 ± 7.7 vs. 137.8 ± 5.9 on T1, and the respiratory rate of the two groups was 26 ± 5 vs. 28 ± 4 breaths/min. Neither oxygenation index nor RR significantly differed between the two groups.ConclusionLUS may be an effective tool for assessing intubation timing in critically ill patients with Covid-19 interstitial pneumonia.

Dataset Information

Lung ultrasound score severity cut-off points in COVID-19 pneumonia. A systematic review and validating cohort.

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Lung ultrasound score severity cut-off points in COVID-19 pneumonia. A systematic review and validating cohort.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets