TY - JOUR
T1 - Lung Ultrasound in the Diagnosis of COVID-19 Pneumonia
T2 - Not Always and Not Only What Is COVID-19 “Glitters”
AU - The CSS-COVID-19 Group
AU - Quarato, Carla Maria Irene
AU - Mirijello, Antonio
AU - Maggi, Michele Maria
AU - Borelli, Cristina
AU - Russo, Raffaele
AU - Lacedonia, Donato
AU - Foschino Barbaro, Maria Pia
AU - Scioscia, Giulia
AU - Tondo, Pasquale
AU - Rea, Gaetano
AU - Simeone, Annalisa
AU - Feragalli, Beatrice
AU - Massa, Valentina
AU - Greco, Antonio
AU - De Cosmo, Salvatore
AU - Sperandeo, Marco
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors would like to use this opportunity to thank healthcare workers of the CSS-COVID-19 group for the hard work and dedication they have put in the last year of pandemic in providing the necessary data collection to carry out this study.
Publisher Copyright:
© Copyright © 2021 Quarato, Mirijello, Maggi, Borelli, Russo, Lacedonia, Foschino Barbaro, Scioscia, Tondo, Rea, Simeone, Feragalli, Massa, Greco, De Cosmo and Sperandeo.
PY - 2021/7/19
Y1 - 2021/7/19
N2 - Background: In the current coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, lung ultrasound (LUS) has been extensively employed to evaluate lung involvement and proposed as a useful screening tool for early diagnosis in the emergency department (ED), prehospitalization triage, and treatment monitoring of COVID-19 pneumonia. However, the actual effectiveness of LUS in characterizing lung involvement in COVID-19 is still unclear. Our aim was to evaluate LUS diagnostic performance in assessing or ruling out COVID-19 pneumonia when compared with chest CT (gold standard) in a population of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients. Methods: A total of 260 consecutive RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2-infected patients were included in the study. All the patients underwent both chest CT scan and concurrent LUS at admission, within the first 6–12 h of hospital stay. Results: Chest CT scan was considered positive when showing a “typical” or “indeterminate” pattern for COVID-19, according to the RSNA classification system. Disease prevalence for COVID-19 pneumonia was 90.77%. LUS demonstrated a sensitivity of 56.78% in detecting lung alteration. The concordance rate for the assessment of abnormalities by both methods increased in the case of peripheral distribution and middle-lower lung location of lesions and in cases of more severe lung involvement. A total of nine patients had a “false-positive” LUS examination. Alternative diagnosis included chronic heart disease (six cases), bronchiectasis (two cases), and subpleural emphysema (one case). LUS specificity was 62.50%. Collateral findings indicative of overlapping conditions at chest CT were recorded also in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and appeared distributed with increasing frequency passing from the group with mild disease (17 cases) to that with severe disease (40 cases). Conclusions: LUS does not seem to be an adequate tool for screening purposes in the ED, due to the risk of missing some lesions and/or to underestimate the actual extent of the disease. Furthermore, the not specificity of LUS implies the possibility to erroneously classify pre-existing or overlapping conditions as COVID-19 pneumonia. It seems more safe to integrate a positive LUS examination with clinical, epidemiological, laboratory, and radiologic findings to suggest a “virosis.” Viral testing confirmation is always required.
AB - Background: In the current coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, lung ultrasound (LUS) has been extensively employed to evaluate lung involvement and proposed as a useful screening tool for early diagnosis in the emergency department (ED), prehospitalization triage, and treatment monitoring of COVID-19 pneumonia. However, the actual effectiveness of LUS in characterizing lung involvement in COVID-19 is still unclear. Our aim was to evaluate LUS diagnostic performance in assessing or ruling out COVID-19 pneumonia when compared with chest CT (gold standard) in a population of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients. Methods: A total of 260 consecutive RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2-infected patients were included in the study. All the patients underwent both chest CT scan and concurrent LUS at admission, within the first 6–12 h of hospital stay. Results: Chest CT scan was considered positive when showing a “typical” or “indeterminate” pattern for COVID-19, according to the RSNA classification system. Disease prevalence for COVID-19 pneumonia was 90.77%. LUS demonstrated a sensitivity of 56.78% in detecting lung alteration. The concordance rate for the assessment of abnormalities by both methods increased in the case of peripheral distribution and middle-lower lung location of lesions and in cases of more severe lung involvement. A total of nine patients had a “false-positive” LUS examination. Alternative diagnosis included chronic heart disease (six cases), bronchiectasis (two cases), and subpleural emphysema (one case). LUS specificity was 62.50%. Collateral findings indicative of overlapping conditions at chest CT were recorded also in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and appeared distributed with increasing frequency passing from the group with mild disease (17 cases) to that with severe disease (40 cases). Conclusions: LUS does not seem to be an adequate tool for screening purposes in the ED, due to the risk of missing some lesions and/or to underestimate the actual extent of the disease. Furthermore, the not specificity of LUS implies the possibility to erroneously classify pre-existing or overlapping conditions as COVID-19 pneumonia. It seems more safe to integrate a positive LUS examination with clinical, epidemiological, laboratory, and radiologic findings to suggest a “virosis.” Viral testing confirmation is always required.
KW - comorbidities
KW - computed tomography
KW - COVID-19
KW - lung ultrasound
KW - screening method
KW - sensitivity
KW - specificity
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85111906509&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85111906509&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3389/fmed.2021.707602
DO - 10.3389/fmed.2021.707602
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85111906509
VL - 8
JO - Frontiers in Medicine
JF - Frontiers in Medicine
SN - 2296-858X
M1 - 707602
ER -