Taghizadieh Ali, Ala Alireza, Rahmani Farzad, Nadi Akbar
Tuberculosis and Lung Disease Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
Emergency Medicine Department, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
Emerg (Tehran). 2015 Summer;3(3):114-6.
Chest x-ray (CXR) is the simplest diagnostic tool of Community Acquired Pneumonia (CAP), but it has some limitation. Therefore, the aim of this study is comparing the diagnostic accuracy of CXR and chest ultrasonography (CUS) in detection of CAP.
In the present study, a consecutive sample of suspected patients with CAP was underwent CUS, CXR, and chest computed tomography (CT) scan. Diagnostic accuracy of CUS and CXR was assessed by calculating the sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and likelihood ratios using SPSS 20 statistical software.
30 patients with CAP were enrolled (93.3% male with mean age of 63.8 ± 18.3 years). Sensitivity of CUS and CXR in detection of CAP were 100.0% (95% Cl: 85.4-100.0) and 93.1% (95% Cl: 75.8-98.8), respectively. Specificity of CXR was 0.0 (95% Cl: 0.0-94.5), while the CUS specificity was not calculable.
Findings of the present study demonstrated on the higher diagnostic accuracy of CUS versus CXR in detection of pneumonia.
胸部X光（CXR）是社区获得性肺炎（CAP）最简单的诊断工具，但它有一些局限性。因此，本研究的目的是比较CXR和胸部超声检查（CUS）在检测CAP方面的诊断准确性。
在本研究中，对连续的疑似CAP患者样本进行了CUS、CXR和胸部计算机断层扫描（CT）检查。使用SPSS 20统计软件通过计算敏感性、特异性、预测值和似然比来评估CUS和CXR的诊断准确性。
纳入了30例CAP患者（男性占93.3%，平均年龄63.8±18.3岁）。CUS和CXR检测CAP的敏感性分别为100.0%（95%可信区间：85.4 - 100.0）和93.1%（95%可信区间：75.8 - 98.8）。CXR的特异性为0.0（95%可信区间：0.0 - 94.5），而CUS的特异性无法计算。
本研究结果表明，在检测肺炎方面，CUS的诊断准确性高于CXR。
