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.

Download full-text


Available from: Gabriele Via, Jun 27, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The value of ultrasound techniques in examination of the pleurae and lungs has been underestimated over recent decades. One explanation for this is the assumption that the ventilated lungs and the bones of the rib cage constitute impermeable obstacles to ultrasound. However, a variety of pathologies of the chest wall, pleurae and lungs result in altered tissue composition, providing substantially increased access and visibility for ultrasound examination. It is a great benefit that the pleurae and lungs can be non-invasively imaged repeatedly without discomfort or radiation exposure for the patient. Ultrasound is thus particularly valuable in follow-up of disease, differential diagnosis and detection of complications. Diagnostic and therapeutic interventions in patients with pathologic pleural and pulmonary findings can tolerably be performed under real-time ultrasound guidance. In this article, an updated overview is given presenting not only the benefits and indications, but also the limitations of pleural and pulmonary ultrasound.
    Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology 02/2015; 41(2). DOI:10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2014.10.002 · 2.10 Impact Factor
  • 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: To describe the use of lung ultrasound in clinical practice and the new opportunities offered by this technology in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Review of signs identified by lung ultrasound and systematic analysis of data published within the last 5 years on its use in ICU. The literature has been extracted from the database Pubmed™. Specific keywords were used to select relevant publications. Clinical studies published in French and English languages were assessed. Lung ultrasound serves to diagnose, quantify, drain and monitor pleural effusions. In patients with acute respiratory failure, lung ultrasound participates to the diagnosis, the implementation of treatments and their follow-up. It helps to manage patients with pneumonia and acute lung injury. Finally, the investigation of the interstitial edema brings information about hemodynamics that can serve to manage our patients. Lung ultrasound is an easy, non-invasive, and non-irradiant technology. It brings lot of useful information at the patient's bedside.
    Annales francaises d'anesthesie et de reanimation 08/2012; 31(10):793-801. DOI:10.1016/j.annfar.2012.07.011 · 0.84 Impact Factor