Lichtenstein Daniel, Goldstein Ivan, Mourgeon Eric, Cluzel Philippe, Grenier Philippe, Rouby Jean-Jacques
Réanimation Chiruricale Pierre Viars, Department of Anesthesiology, Hôpital de la Pitié-Salpétrière, Université Pierre et Marie Cuire, Paris IV, France.
Anesthesiology. 2004 Jan;100(1):9-15. doi: 10.1097/00000542-200401000-00006.
Lung auscultation and bedside chest radiography are routinely used to assess the respiratory condition of ventilated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Clinical experience suggests that the diagnostic accuracy of these procedures is poor.
This prospective study of 32 patients with ARDS and 10 healthy volunteers was performed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of auscultation, bedside chest radiography, and lung ultrasonography with that of thoracic computed tomography. Three pathologic entities were evaluated in 384 lung regions (12 per patient): pleural effusion, alveolar consolidation, and alveolar-interstitial syndrome.
Auscultation had a diagnostic accuracy of 61% for pleural effusion, 36% for alveolar consolidation, and 55% for alveolar-interstitial syndrome. Bedside chest radiography had a diagnostic accuracy of 47% for pleural effusion, 75% for alveolar consolidation, and 72% for alveolar-interstitial syndrome. Lung ultrasonography had a diagnostic accuracy of 93% for pleural effusion, 97% for alveolar consolidation, and 95% for alveolar-interstitial syndrome. Lung ultrasonography, in contrast to auscultation and chest radiography, could quantify the extent of lung injury. Interobserver agreement for the ultrasound findings as assessed by the kappa statistic was satisfactory: 0.74, 0.77, and 0.73 for detection of alveolar-interstitial syndrome, alveolar consolidation, and pleural effusion, respectively.
At the bedside, lung ultrasonography is highly sensitive, specific, and reproducible for diagnosing the main lung pathologic entities in patients with ARDS and can be considered an attractive alternative to bedside chest radiography and thoracic computed tomography.
肺部听诊和床边胸部X线摄影常用于评估急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)通气患者的呼吸状况。临床经验表明,这些检查的诊断准确性较差。
对32例ARDS患者和10名健康志愿者进行了这项前瞻性研究,以比较听诊、床边胸部X线摄影、肺部超声与胸部计算机断层扫描的诊断准确性。在384个肺区域(每位患者12个)评估了三种病理情况:胸腔积液、肺泡实变和肺泡间质综合征。
听诊对胸腔积液的诊断准确率为61%,对肺泡实变的诊断准确率为36%,对肺泡间质综合征的诊断准确率为55%。床边胸部X线摄影对胸腔积液的诊断准确率为47%,对肺泡实变的诊断准确率为75%,对肺泡间质综合征的诊断准确率为72%。肺部超声对胸腔积液的诊断准确率为93%,对肺泡实变的诊断准确率为97%,对肺泡间质综合征的诊断准确率为95%。与听诊和胸部X线摄影不同,肺部超声可以量化肺损伤的程度。通过kappa统计量评估的超声检查结果的观察者间一致性令人满意:检测肺泡间质综合征、肺泡实变和胸腔积液的kappa值分别为0.74、0.77和0.73。
在床边,肺部超声对诊断ARDS患者的主要肺部病理情况具有高度敏感性、特异性和可重复性,可被视为床边胸部X线摄影和胸部计算机断层扫描的有吸引力的替代方法。