Alrajab Saadah, Youssef Asser M, Akkus Nuri I, Caldito Gloria
Crit Care. 2013 Sep 23;17(5):R208. doi: 10.1186/cc13016.
Ultrasonography is being increasingly utilized in acute care settings with expanding applications. Pneumothorax evaluation by ultrasonography is a fast, safe, easy and inexpensive alternative to chest radiographs. In this review, we provide a comprehensive analysis of the current literature comparing ultrasonography and chest radiography for the diagnosis of pneumothorax.
We searched English-language articles in MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library dealing with both ultrasonography and chest radiography for diagnosis of pneumothorax. In eligible studies that met strict inclusion criteria, we conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of pleural ultrasonography in comparison with chest radiography for the diagnosis of pneumothorax.
We reviewed 601 articles and selected 25 original research articles for detailed review. Only 13 articles met all of our inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. One study used lung sliding sign alone, 12 studies used lung sliding and comet tail signs, and 6 studies searched for lung point in addition to the other two signs. Ultrasonography had a pooled sensitivity of 78.6% (95% CI, 68.1 to 98.1) and a specificity of 98.4% (95% CI, 97.3 to 99.5). Chest radiography had a pooled sensitivity of 39.8% (95% CI, 29.4 to 50.3) and a specificity of 99.3% (95% CI, 98.4 to 100). Our meta-regression and subgroup analyses indicate that consecutive sampling of patients compared to convenience sampling provided higher sensitivity results for both ultrasonography and chest radiography. Consecutive versus nonconsecutive sampling and trauma versus nontrauma settings were significant sources of heterogeneity. In addition, subgroup analysis showed significant variations related to operator and type of probe used.
Our study indicates that ultrasonography is more accurate than chest radiography for detection of pneumothorax. The results support the previous investigations in this field, add new valuable information obtained from subgroup analysis, and provide accurate estimates for the performance parameters of both bedside ultrasonography and chest radiography for pneumothorax evaluation.
随着应用范围的不断扩大,超声检查在急性护理环境中的使用越来越频繁。超声检查评估气胸是一种快速、安全、简便且经济的替代胸部X线检查的方法。在本综述中,我们对当前比较超声检查和胸部X线检查诊断气胸的文献进行了全面分析。
我们在MEDLINE、EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆中检索了涉及超声检查和胸部X线检查诊断气胸的英文文章。在符合严格纳入标准的合格研究中,我们进行了荟萃分析,以评估胸膜超声检查与胸部X线检查相比诊断气胸的准确性。
我们回顾了601篇文章,并选择了25篇原创研究文章进行详细审查。只有13篇文章符合我们所有的纳入标准,并被纳入最终分析。1项研究仅使用了肺滑动征,12项研究使用了肺滑动征和彗尾征,6项研究除了其他两个征之外还寻找了肺点。超声检查的合并敏感性为78.6%(95%可信区间,68.1%至98.1%),特异性为98.4%(95%可信区间,97.3%至99.5%)。胸部X线检查的合并敏感性为39.8%(95%可信区间,29.4%至50.3%),特异性为99.3%(95%可信区间,98.4%至100%)。我们的荟萃回归和亚组分析表明,与方便抽样相比,对患者进行连续抽样可为超声检查和胸部X线检查提供更高的敏感性结果。连续抽样与非连续抽样以及创伤与非创伤环境是异质性的重要来源。此外,亚组分析显示与操作者和使用的探头类型有关的显著差异。
我们的研究表明,超声检查在检测气胸方面比胸部X线检查更准确。这些结果支持了该领域以前的研究,增加了从亚组分析中获得的新的有价值信息,并为床旁超声检查和胸部X线检查评估气胸的性能参数提供了准确估计。