Article

International evidence-based recommendations for point-of-care lung ultrasound

Department of Emergency Medicine, San Luigi Gonzaga University Hospital, 10043 Orbassano, Torino, Italy.
European Journal of Intensive Care Medicine (Impact Factor: 5.54). 03/2012; 38(4):577-91. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-012-2513-4
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The purpose of this study is to provide evidence-based and expert consensus recommendations for lung ultrasound with focus on emergency and critical care settings.
A multidisciplinary panel of 28 experts from eight countries was involved. Literature was reviewed from January 1966 to June 2011. Consensus members searched multiple databases including Pubmed, Medline, OVID, Embase, and others. The process used to develop these evidence-based recommendations involved two phases: determining the level of quality of evidence and developing the recommendation. The quality of evidence is assessed by the grading of recommendation, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) method. However, the GRADE system does not enforce a specific method on how the panel should reach decisions during the consensus process. Our methodology committee decided to utilize the RAND appropriateness method for panel judgment and decisions/consensus.
Seventy-three proposed statements were examined and discussed in three conferences held in Bologna, Pisa, and Rome. Each conference included two rounds of face-to-face modified Delphi technique. Anonymous panel voting followed each round. The panel did not reach an agreement and therefore did not adopt any recommendations for six statements. Weak/conditional recommendations were made for 2 statements, and strong recommendations were made for the remaining 65 statements. The statements were then recategorized and grouped to their current format. Internal and external peer-review processes took place before submission of the recommendations. Updates will occur at least every 4 years or whenever significant major changes in evidence appear.
This document reflects the overall results of the first consensus conference on "point-of-care" lung ultrasound. Statements were discussed and elaborated by experts who published the vast majority of papers on clinical use of lung ultrasound in the last 20 years. Recommendations were produced to guide implementation, development, and standardization of lung ultrasound in all relevant settings.

5 Followers
 · 
400 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background and Objective. Chest X-ray is recommended for routine use in patients with suspected pneumonia, but its use in emergency settings is limited. In this study, the diagnostic performance of a new method for quantitative analysis of lung ultrasonography was compared with bedside chest X-ray and visual lung ultrasonography for detection of community-acquired pneumonia, using thoracic computed tomography as a gold standard. Methods. Thirty-two spontaneously breathing patients with suspected community-acquired pneumonia, undergoing computed tomography examination, were consecutively enrolled. Each hemithorax was evaluated for the presence or absence of abnormalities by chest X-ray and quantitative or visual ultrasonography. Results. Quantitative ultrasonography showed higher sensitivity (93%), specificity (95%), and diagnostic accuracy (94%) than chest X-ray (64%, 80%, and 69%, resp.), visual ultrasonography (68%, 95%, and 77%, resp.), or their combination (77%, 75%, and 77%, resp.). Conclusions. Quantitative lung ultrasonography was considerably more accurate than either chest X-ray or visual ultrasonography in the diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia and it may represent a useful first-line approach for confirmation of clinical diagnosis in emergency settings.
    BioMed Research International 02/2015; 2015. DOI:10.1155/2015/868707 · 2.71 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Bedside lung ultrasound (LUS) is a noninvasive, readily available imaging modality that can complement clinical evaluation. The Bedside Lung Ultrasound in Emergency (BLUE) protocol has demonstrated a high diagnostic accuracy in patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF). Recently, bedside LUS has been added to the medical training program of our ICU. The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of LUS based on the BLUE protocol, when performed by physicians who are not ultrasound experts, to guide the diagnosis of ARF. Over a one-year period, all spontaneously breathing adult patients consecutively admitted to the ICU for ARF were prospectively included. After training, 4 non-ultrasound experts performed LUS within 20 minutes of patient admission. They were blinded to patient medical history. LUS diagnosis was compared with the final clinical diagnosis made by the ICU team before patients were discharged from the ICU (gold standard). Thirty-seven patients were included in the analysis (mean age, 73.2 ± 14.7 years; APACHE II, 19.2 ± 7.3). LUS diagnosis had a good agreement with the final diagnosis in 84% of patients (overall kappa, 0.81). The most common etiologies for ARF were pneumonia (n = 17) and hemodynamic lung edema (n = 15). The sensitivity and specificity of LUS as measured against the final diagnosis were, respectively, 88% and 90% for pneumonia and 86% and 87% for hemodynamic lung edema. LUS based on the BLUE protocol was reproducible by physicians who are not ultrasound experts and accurate for the diagnosis of pneumonia and hemodynamic lung edema.
    Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia: publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia 01/2015; 41(1):58-64. DOI:10.1590/S1806-37132015000100008 · 1.27 Impact Factor
  • Source

Full-text

Download
156 Downloads
Available from
May 29, 2014