ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Point Of Care Ultra-Sound (POCUS) is an operator dependent modality. POCUS examinations usually include 'Eyeballing' the inspected anatomical structure without conducting accurate measurements due to complexity and insufficient time. Automatic real time measuring tools can make accurate measurements fast and simple and dramatically increase examination reliability while saving the operator much time and effort. In this study we aim to assess three automatic tools which are integrated into the Venue™ device by GE: the automatic ejection fraction, velocity time integral, and inferior vena cava tools in comparison to the gold standard-an examination by a POCUS expert. METHODS: A separate study was conducted for each of the three automatic tools. In each study, cardiac views were acquired by a POCUS expert. Relevant measurements were taken by both an auto tool and a POCUS expert who was blinded to the auto tool's measurement. The agreement between the POCUS expert and the auto tool was measured for both the measurements and the image quality using a Cohen's Kappa test. RESULTS: All three tools have shown good agreement with the POCUS expert for high quality views: auto LVEF (0.498; p < 0.001), auto IVC (0.536; p = 0.009), and the auto VTI (0.655; p = 0.024). Auto VTI has also shown a good agreement for medium quality clips (0.914; p < 0.001). Image quality agreement was significant for the auto EF and auto IVC tools. CONCLUSIONS: The Venue™ show a high agreement with a POCUS expert for high quality views. This shows that auto tools can provide reliable real time assistance in performing accurate measurements, but do not reduce the need of a good image acquisition technique.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In COVID-19 patients, lung ultrasound is superior to chest radiograph and has good agreement with computerized tomography to diagnose lung pathologies. Most lung ultrasound protocols published to date are complex and time-consuming. We describe a new illustrative Point-of-care ultrasound Lung Injury Score (PLIS) to help guide the care of patients with COVID-19 and assess if the PLIS would be able to predict COVID-19 patients' clinical course. METHODS: This retrospective study describing the novel PLIS was conducted in a large tertiary-level hospital. COVID-19 patients were included if they required any form of respiratory support and had at least one PLIS study during hospitalization. Data collected included PLIS on admission, demographics, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores, and patient outcomes. The primary outcome was the need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission. RESULTS: A total of 109 patients and 293 PLIS studies were included in our analysis. The mean age was 60.9, and overall mortality was 18.3%. Median PLIS score was 5.0 (3.0-6.0) vs. 2.0 (1.0-3.0) in ICU and non-ICU patients respectively (p<0.001). Total PLIS scores were directly associated with SOFA scores (inter-class correlation 0.63, p<0.001), and multivariate analysis showed that every increase in one PLIS point was associated with a higher risk for ICU admission (O.R 2.09, 95% C.I 1.59-2.75) and in-hospital mortality (O.R 1.54, 95% C.I 1.10-2.16). CONCLUSIONS: The PLIS for COVID-19 patients is simple and associated with SOFA score, ICU admission, and in-hospital mortality. Further studies are needed to demonstrate whether the PLIS can improve outcomes and become an integral part of the management of COVID-19 patients.
