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










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Ultrasound Med ; 41(10): 2547-2556, 2022 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35040507

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Lung ultrasound (LUS) holds the promise of an accurate, radiation-free, and affordable diagnostic and monitoring tool in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia. We sought to evaluate the usefulness of LUS in the diagnosis of patients with respiratory distress and suspicion of interstitial severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pneumonia, in comparison to other imaging modalities. METHODS: This was a multicenter, retrospective study. LUS was performed, on Emergency Department (ED) arrival of patients presenting for possible COVID-19 evaluation, by trained emergency physicians, before undergoing conventional radiologic examination or while waiting for the report. Scans were performed using longitudinal transducer orientation of the lung regions. CXR was interpreted by radiologists staffing ED radiology. Subjects were divided into two group based on molecular test results. LUS findings were compared to COVID test results, nonlaboratory data, and other imaging for each patient. Categorical variables were expressed as percentages and continuous variables as median ± standard error. RESULTS: A total of 479 patients were enrolled, 87% diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 by molecular testing. COVID positive and COVID negative patients differed with respect to sex, presence of fever, and white blood cells count. Most common findings on lung point of care ultrasound (POCUS) for COVID-positive patients were B-lines, irregular pleural lines, and small consolidation. Normal chest X-ray was found in 17.89% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: This 479 patient cohort, with COVID-19, found LUS to be noninferior to chest X-ray (CXR) for diagnostic accuracy. In this study, COVID-positive patients are most likely to show B lines and sub-pleural consolidations on LUS examination.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Neumonía , COVID-19/diagnóstico por imagen , Humanos , Pulmón/diagnóstico por imagen , Estudios Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Ultrasonografía/métodos
2.
Ultrasound Med Biol ; 47(1): 68-75, 2021 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33097313

RESUMEN

This study sought to compare point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) and conventional X-rays for detecting fractures in children. This was a prospective, non-randomized, convenience-sample study conducted in five medical centers. It evaluated pediatric patients with trauma. POCUS and X-ray examination results were treated as dichotomous variables with fracture either present or absent. Descriptive statistics were calculated in addition to prevalence, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value, including 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The Cohen κ coefficient was determined as a measurement of the level of agreement. A total of 554 examinations were performed with POCUS and X-ray. On physical examination, swelling, localized hematoma and functional limitation were found in 66.73%, 33.78% and 53.74% of participants, respectively. The most-studied areas were limbs and hands/feet (58.19% and 38.27%), whereas the thorax was less represented (3.54%). Sensitivity of POCUS was 91.67% (95% CI, 76.41-97.82%) for high-skill providers and 71.50 % (95% CI, 64.75-77.43%) for standard-skill providers. Specificity was 88.89% (95% CI, 73.00-96.34%) and 82.91% (95% CI, 77.82-87.06%) for high- and standard-skill providers, respectively. Positive predictive value was 89.19% (95% CI, 73.64-96.48%) and 75.90% (95% CI, 69.16-81.59%) for high- and standard-skill providers, respectively. Negative predictive value was 91.43% (95% CI, 75.81-97.76%) and 79.44% (95% CI, 74.21-83.87%) for high- and standard-skill providers, respectively. The Cohen κ coefficient showed very good agreement (0.81) for high-skill providers, but moderate agreement (0.54) for standard-skill providers. We noted good diagnostic accuracy of POCUS in evaluating fracture, with excellent sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value for high-skill providers.


Asunto(s)
Fracturas Óseas/diagnóstico por imagen , Pruebas en el Punto de Atención , Adolescente , Niño , Preescolar , Femenino , Humanos , Lactante , Masculino , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Estudios Prospectivos , Radiografía , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Ultrasonografía
3.
Ultrasound Med Biol ; 46(1): 11-19, 2020 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31585766

RESUMEN

Despite its limitations, conventional radiography is the method of choice for fracture evaluation in the emergency department. Only a few studies, moreover in limited populations, have evaluated the possible benefits of ultrasound (US), and especially of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS), in the diagnosis of fractures. We sought to compare the accuracy of POCUS with that of conventional radiography in the diagnosis of bone fractures. This prospective study with a non-randomly allocated convenience sample was conducted at two academic medical centers. Four physicians, with focused training in musculoskeletal POCUS, evaluated consecutive patients with suspected orthopedic injury. US and X-ray examination results were treated as dichotomous variables with either fracture present or fracture absent. Descriptive statistics were calculated in addition to prevalence, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value including 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Cohen's κ coefficient was determined as a measurement of the level of agreement. Four hundred sixty-nine patients (404 adult and 65 pediatric) ranging in age from 1-97 y were enrolled at two different hospitals. Seven hundred six examinations, both US and X-ray, were performed in 634 suspected fractures in adults (age ≥18 y) and 72 in children. On physical examination, swelling, localized hematoma and functional limitation were found in 64.61%, 34.97% and 53.52, respectively. The sensitivity of US examination was 93.89% (CI: 89.74%-96.49%) for all patients and 94.30% (CI: 89.77%-96.98%) and 91.67% (CI: 76.41%-97.82%) in adult and pediatric groups, respectively. Specificity was 94.13% (CI: 91.53-95.99), 94.56% (CI: 91.89-96.41) and 88.89% (CI: 73.00-96.38) for the whole group, adults and children, respectively. The positive predictive value was 88.48% (CI: 83.62%-92.08%), 88.35% (CI: 82.97%-92.24%) and 89.19% (CI: 73.64%-96.48%) for the whole group, adults and children, respectively. The negative predictive value was 96.98% (CI: 94.86%-98.27%), 97.43% (CI: 95.31%-98.64%) and 91.43% (CI: 75.81%-97.76%) in the three groups, respectively. Cohen's κ coefficient revealed high agreement of 0.87 for both the whole group and adult patients and 0.81 for pediatric patients. We found that POCUS has significant diagnostic accuracy in evaluating fracture compared with plain radiography, with excellent sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values.


Asunto(s)
Fracturas Óseas/diagnóstico por imagen , Pruebas en el Punto de Atención , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Niño , Preescolar , Femenino , Humanos , Lactante , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Proyectos Piloto , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Estudios Prospectivos , Radiografía , Ultrasonografía , Adulto Joven
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA