Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Añadir filtros

Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año
1.
Front Med (Lausanne) ; 9: 1021929, 2022.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2292343

RESUMEN

Background: While point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has been used to track worsening COVID-19 disease it is unclear if there are dynamic differences between severity trajectories. Methods: We studied 12-lung zone protocol scans from 244 participants [with repeat scans obtained in 3 days (N = 114), 7 days (N = 53), and weekly (N = 9)] ≥ 18 years of age hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia. Differences in mean lung ultrasound (LUS) scores and percent of lung fields with A-lines over time were compared between peak severity levels (as defined by the WHO clinical progression scale) using linear mixed-effects models. Results: Mean LUS scores were elevated by 0.19 (p = 0.035) and A-lines were present in 14.7% fewer lung fields (p = 0.02) among those with ICU-level or fatal peak illness compared to less severe hospitalized illness, regardless of duration of illness. There were no differences between severity groups in the trajectories of mean LUS score 0.19 (p = 0.66) or percent A-lines (p = 0.40). Discussion: Our results do not support the use of serial LUS scans to monitor COVID-19 disease progression among hospitalized adults.

2.
Frontiers in medicine ; 9, 2022.
Artículo en Inglés | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2147123

RESUMEN

Background While point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has been used to track worsening COVID-19 disease it is unclear if there are dynamic differences between severity trajectories. Methods We studied 12-lung zone protocol scans from 244 participants [with repeat scans obtained in 3 days (N = 114), 7 days (N = 53), and weekly (N = 9)] ≥ 18 years of age hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia. Differences in mean lung ultrasound (LUS) scores and percent of lung fields with A-lines over time were compared between peak severity levels (as defined by the WHO clinical progression scale) using linear mixed-effects models. Results Mean LUS scores were elevated by 0.19 (p = 0.035) and A-lines were present in 14.7% fewer lung fields (p = 0.02) among those with ICU-level or fatal peak illness compared to less severe hospitalized illness, regardless of duration of illness. There were no differences between severity groups in the trajectories of mean LUS score 0.19 (p = 0.66) or percent A-lines (p = 0.40). Discussion Our results do not support the use of serial LUS scans to monitor COVID-19 disease progression among hospitalized adults.

3.
Ultrasound J ; 13(1): 12, 2021 Mar 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1105733

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: As medical infrastructures are strained by SARS-CoV-2, rapid and accurate screening tools are essential. In portions of the world, reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing remains slow and in limited supply, and computed tomography is expensive, inefficient, and involves exposure to ionizing radiation. Multiple studies evaluating the efficiency of lung point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) have been published recently, but include relatively small cohorts and often focus on characteristics associated with severe illness rather than screening efficacy. This study utilizes a retrospective cohort to evaluate the test characteristics (sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, predictive values) of lung POCUS in the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2, and to determine lung score cutoffs that maximize performance for use as a screening tool. RESULTS: Lung POCUS examinations had sensitivity 86%, specificity 71.6%, NPV 81.7%, and PPV 77.7%. The Lung Ultrasound Score had an area under the curve of 0.84 (95% CI 0.78, 0.90). When including only complete examinations visualizing 12 lung fields, lung POCUS had sensitivity 90.9% and specificity 75.6%, with NPV 87.2% and PPV 82.0% and an area under the curve of 0.89 (95% CI 0.83, 0.96). Lung POCUS was less accurate in patients with a history of interstitial lung disease, severe emphysema, and heart failure. CONCLUSIONS: When applied in the appropriate patient population, lung POCUS is an inexpensive and reliable tool for rapid screening and diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 in symptomatic patients with influenza-like illness. Adoption of lung POCUS screening for SARS-CoV-2 may identify patients who do not require additional testing and reduce the need for RT-PCR testing in resource-limited environments and during surge periods.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA