Focused abdominal ultrasound.

A focused point-of-care abdominal ultrasound is an examination performed at the patient's location and interpreted within the clinical context. This review gives an overview of this examination modality. The objective is to rapidly address predefined dichotomised questions about the presence of an abdominal aortic aneurysm, gallstones, cholecystitis, hydronephrosis, urinary retention, free intraperitoneal fluid, and small bowel obstruction. FAUS is a valuable tool for emergency physicians to promptly confirm various conditions upon the patients' arrival, thus reducing the time to diagnosis and in some cases eliminating the need for other imaging.

Focused cardiac ultrasound in emergency medicine.

Focused cardiac ultrasound (FoCUS) is a point-of-care cardiac examination performed and interpreted by the emergency physician in the clinical context. This review summarises the current knowledge of FoCUS. The objective is to answer four predefined clinical questions: Are there any signs of pericardial effusion? Are there any signs of right ventricular dilatation? Are there any signs of reduced or hyperdynamic left ventricular function? Are there any signs of abnormal inferior vena cava? FoCUS is not a replacement for echocardiography but a useful tool in detecting cardiopulmonary pathology and haemodynamic abnormalities in the emergency setting.

Remote dielectric sensing to detect acute heart failure in patients with dyspnoea: a prospective observational study in the emergency department.

Aims: Remote dielectric sensing (ReDS) enables quick estimation of lung fluid content. To examine if ReDS is superior to other methods in detecting acute heart failure. Methods and results: We included consecutive patients with dyspnoea from the emergency departments at Bispebjerg Hospital, Copenhagen, and performed ReDS, low-dose chest computed tomography (CT), echocardiogram, lung ultrasound, NT-Pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), and a Boston score evaluation (chest X-ray and clinical signs). ReDS values >35% were used as a cut-off to diagnose pulmonary congestion. Acute heart failure was adjudicated by experts' review of health records but independently of ReDS values. Sub-analyses investigated ReDS in acute heart failure patients with congestion on CT. We included 97 patients within a median of 4.8 h from admittance: 25 patients (26%) were ReDS-positive and 39 (40%) had adjudicated acute heart failure (21 with and 18 without CT congestion). Heart failure patients had median ReDS 33%, left ventricular ejection fraction 48%, and NT-proBNP 2935 ng/L. A positive ReDS detected heart failure with 46% sensitivity, 88% specificity, and 71% accuracy. The AUC for ReDS was like the Boston score (P = 0.88) and the lung ultrasound score (P = 0.74). CT-congested heart failure patients had higher ReDS values than patients without heart failure (median 38 vs. 28%, P < 0.001). Heart failure patients without CT-congestion had ReDS values like patients without heart failure (mean 30 vs. 28%, P = 0.07). Conclusion: ReDS detects acute heart failure similarly to the Boston score and lung ultrasound score, and ReDS primarily identifies the acute heart failure patients who have congestion on a chest CT.

Chest computed tomography features of heart failure: A prospective observational study in patients with acute dyspnea.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary congestion is a key component of heart failure (HF) that chest computed tomography (CT) can detect. However, no guideline describes which of many anticipated CT signs are most associated with HF in patients with undifferentiated dyspnea. METHODS: In a prospective observational single-center study, we included consecutive patients ≥ 50 years admitted with acute dyspnea to the emergency department. Patients underwent immediate clinical examination, blood sampling, echocardiography, and CT. Two radiologists independently evaluated all images. Acute HF (AHF) was adjudicated by an expert panel blinded to radiology images. LASSO and logistic regression identified the independent CT signs of AHF. RESULTS: Among 232 patients, 102 (44%) had AHF. Of 18 examined CT signs, 5 were associated with AHF (multivariate odds ratio, 95% confidence interval): enlarged heart (20.38, 6.86-76.16), bilateral interlobular thickening (11.67, 1.78-230.99), bilateral pleural effusion (6.39, 1.98-22.85), and increased vascular diameter (4.49, 1.08-33.92). Bilateral ground-glass opacification (2.07, 0.95-4.52) was a consistent fifth essential sign, although it was only significant in univariate analysis. Eighty-eight (38%) patients had none of the five CT signs corresponding to a 68% specificity and 86% sensitivity for AHF, while two or more of the five CT signs occurred in 68 (29%) patients, corresponding to 97% specificity and 67% sensitivity. A weighted score based on these five CT signs had an 0.88 area under the curve to detect AHF. CONCLUSIONS: Five CT signs seem sufficient to assess the risk of AHF in the acute setting. The absence of these signs indicates a low probability, one sign makes AHF highly probable, and two or more CT signs mean almost certain AHF.

Clinical Applicability of Lung Ultrasound Methods in the Emergency Department to Detect Pulmonary Congestion on Computed Tomography.

BACKGROUND: B-lines on lung ultrasound are seen in decompensated heart failure, but their diagnostic value in consecutive patients in the acute setting is not clear. Chest CT is the superior method to evaluate interstitial lung disease, but no studies have compared lung ultrasound directly to congestion on chest CT. PURPOSE: To examine whether congestion on lung ultrasound equals congestion on a low-dose chest CT as the gold standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a single-center, prospective observational study we included consecutive patients ≥ 50 years of age in the emergency department. Patients were concurrently examined by lung ultrasound and chest CT. Congestion on lung ultrasound was examined in three ways: I) the total number of B-lines, II) ≥ 3 B-lines bilaterally, III) ≥ 3 B-lines bilaterally and/or bilateral pleural effusion. Congestion on CT was assessed by two specialists blinded to all other data. RESULTS: We included 117 patients, 27 % of whom had a history of heart failure and 52 % chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Lung ultrasound and CT were performed within a median time of 79.0 minutes. Congestion on CT was detected in 32 patients (27 %). Method I had an optimal cut-point of 7 B-lines with a sensitivity of 72 % and a specificity of 81 % for congestion. Method II had 44 % sensitivity, and 94 % specificity. Method III had a sensitivity of 88 % and a specificity of 85 %. CONCLUSION: Pulmonary congestion in consecutive dyspneic patients ≥ 50 years of age is better diagnosed if lung ultrasound evaluates both B-lines and pleural effusion instead of B-lines alone.