Integrated ultrasonographic approach to evaluate fluid responsiveness in critically ill patients.

In patients with acute circulatory failure, we tested the feasibility of the evaluation of the fluid-responsiveness (FR) by a combined approach with echocardiography and lung ultrasound. We enrolled 113 consecutive patients admitted to the Emergency Department High-Dependency Unit of Careggi University-Hospital from January 2015 to June 2020. We assessed: (1) inferior vena cava collapsibility index (IVCCI); (2) the variation of aortic flow (VTIAo) during the passive leg raising test (PLR); (3) the presence of interstitial syndrome by lung ultrasound. FR was defined as an increase in the VTIAo > 10% during PLR or IVCCI ≥ 40%. FR patients were treated with fluid and those non-FR with diuretics or vasopressors. The therapeutic strategy was reassessed after 12 h. The goal was to maintain the initial strategy. Among 56 FR patients, at lung ultrasound, 15 patients showed basal interstitial syndrome and 4 all-lung involvement. One fluid bolus was given to 51 patients. Among 57 non-FR patients, 26 patients showed interstitial syndrome at lung ultrasound (basal fields in 14, all lungs in 12). We administered diuretics to 21 patients and vasopressors to 4 subjects. We had to change the initial treatment plan in 9% non-FR patients and in 12% FR patients (p = NS). In the first 12 h after the evaluation, non-FR patients received significantly less fluids compared to those FR (1119 ± 410 vs 2010 ± 1254 ml, p < 0.001). The evaluation of the FR based on echocardiography and lung ultrasound was associated with the reduction in fluid administration for non-FR patients compared with those FR.

Point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) in the early diagnosis of novel coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19) in a first-level emergency department during a SARS-CoV-2 outbreak in Italy: a real-life analysis.

In December 2019, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARSCoV-2) spread worldwide, challenging emergency departments (EDs) with the need of rapid diagnosis for appropriate allocation in dedicated setting. Many authors highlighted the role of lung ultrasound (LUS) in management of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The study aims to analyze the performance of LUS in the early identification of COVID-19 patients in ED during a SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. We prospectively collected consecutive adult patients admitted to a first-level ED in Powered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation Florence with history or symptoms suggestive for COVID-19 that underwent LUS during the ED management. LUS findings were categorized in 6 discrete main etiological patterns. "A", "Cardiogenic B" and "Typical C" patterns were referred as non-COVID-19-suggestive, while "Atypical" B or C patterns, "Multiple Consolidations" pattern and "ARDS" pattern were referred as COVID-19-suggestive. The primary outcome was the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. From 12 March to 12 May 2020, 360 patients were enrolled. COVID-19 suggestive LUS findings were significantly associated with final COVID-19 diagnosis (86% in COVID-19 vs 29% in non-COVID-19, p < 0.001). The presence in ED of at least one in positive swab OR a COVID-19-suggestive LUS showed a sensitivity of 97% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 98%. In patients with known SARS-CoV-2 exposition in the last 14 days, a COVID-19-suggestive pattern at LUS had a positive predictive value (PPV) of 97% for COVID-19 diagnosis. Point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) is a valuable tool for diagnostic stratification during COVID-19 outbreaks. LUS can help physicians in identifying false-negative RT-PCR, improving its diagnostic sensitivity in ED.

Point-of-Care Ultrasonography for Evaluation of Acute Dyspnea in the ED.

BACKGROUND: Acute dyspnea is a common symptom in the ED. The standard approach to dyspnea often relies on radiologic and laboratory results, causing excessive delay before adequate therapy is started. Use of an integrated point-of-care ultrasonography (PoCUS) approach can shorten the time needed to formulate a diagnosis, while maintaining an acceptable safety profile. METHODS: Consecutive adult patients presenting with dyspnea and admitted after ED evaluation were prospectively enrolled. The gold standard was the final diagnosis assessed by two expert reviewers. Two physicians independently evaluated the patient; a sonographer performed an ultrasound evaluation of the lung, heart, and inferior vena cava, while the treating physician requested traditional tests as needed. Time needed to formulate the ultrasound and the ED diagnoses was recorded and compared. Accuracy and concordance of the ultrasound and the ED diagnoses were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 2,683 patients were enrolled. The average time needed to formulate the ultrasound diagnosis was significantly lower than that required for ED diagnosis (24 ± 10 min vs 186 ± 72 min; P = .025). The ultrasound and the ED diagnoses showed good overall concordance (κ = 0.71). There were no statistically significant differences in the accuracy of PoCUS and the standard ED evaluation for the diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome, pneumonia, pleural effusion, pericardial effusion, pneumothorax, and dyspnea from other causes. PoCUS was significantly more sensitive for the diagnosis of heart failure, whereas a standard ED evaluation performed better in the diagnosis of COPD/asthma and pulmonary embolism. CONCLUSIONS: PoCUS represents a feasible and reliable diagnostic approach to the patient with dyspnea, allowing a reduction in time to diagnosis. This protocol could help to stratify patients who should undergo a more detailed evaluation.