Pisani Luigi, Vercesi Veronica, van Tongeren Patricia S I, Lagrand Wim K, Leopold Stije J, Huson Mischa A M, Henwood Patricia C, Walden Andrew, Smit Marry R, Riviello Elisabeth D, Pelosi Paolo, Dondorp Arjen M, Schultz Marcus J
Department of Intensive Care, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, AMC, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Mahidol-Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit (MORU), Mahidol University, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand.
Intensive Care Med Exp. 2019 Jul 25;7(Suppl 1):44. doi: 10.1186/s40635-019-0241-6.
Semi-quantification of lung aeration by ultrasound helps to assess presence and extent of pulmonary pathologies, including the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). It is uncertain which lung regions add most to the diagnostic accuracy for ARDS of the frequently used global lung ultrasound (LUS) score. We aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the global versus those of regional LUS scores in invasively ventilated intensive care unit patients.
This was a post-hoc analysis of a single-center observational study in the mixed medical-surgical intensive care unit of a university-affiliated hospital in the Netherlands. Consecutive patients, aged ≥ 18 years, and are expected to receive invasive ventilation for > 24 h underwent a LUS examination within the first 2 days of ventilation. The Berlin Definition was used to diagnose ARDS, and to classify ARDS severity. From the 12-region LUS examinations, the global score (minimum 0 to maximum 36) and 3 regional scores (the 'anterior,' 'lateral,' and 'posterior' score, minimum 0 to maximum 12) were computed. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve was calculated and the best cutoff for ARDS discrimination was determined for all scores.
The study enrolled 152 patients; 35 patients had ARDS. The global score was higher in patients with ARDS compared to patients without ARDS (median 19 [15-23] vs. 5 [3-9]; P < 0.001). The posterior score was the main contributor to the global score, and was the only score that increased significantly with ARDS severity. However, the posterior score performed worse than the global score in diagnosing ARDS, and it had a positive predictive value of only 50 (41-59)% when using the optimal cutoff. The combined anterolateral score performed as good as the global score (AUROC of 0.91 [0.85-0.97] vs. 0.91 [0.86-0.95]).
While the posterior score increases with ARDS severity, its diagnostic accuracy for ARDS is hampered due to an unfavorable signal-to-noise ratio. An 8-region 'anterolateral' score performs as well as the global score and may prove useful to exclude ARDS in invasively ventilated ICU patients.
超声对肺通气进行半定量有助于评估肺部病变的存在及程度,包括急性呼吸窘迫综合征(ARDS)。目前尚不确定哪些肺区域对常用的整体肺部超声(LUS)评分诊断ARDS的准确性贡献最大。我们旨在比较整体LUS评分与区域LUS评分对接受有创通气的重症监护病房患者ARDS的诊断准确性。
这是一项对荷兰一家大学附属医院内科与外科混合重症监护病房的单中心观察性研究的事后分析。年龄≥18岁、预计接受有创通气超过24小时的连续患者在通气的前两天内接受了LUS检查。采用柏林定义诊断ARDS,并对ARDS严重程度进行分类。从12个区域的LUS检查中计算出整体评分(最低0分至最高36分)和3个区域评分(“前侧”、“外侧”和“后侧”评分,最低0分至最高12分)。计算受试者操作特征(AUROC)曲线下面积,并确定所有评分鉴别ARDS的最佳临界值。
该研究纳入了152例患者;35例患有ARDS。与无ARDS患者相比,ARDS患者的整体评分更高(中位数19[15 - 23] vs. 5[3 - 9];P < 0.001)。后侧评分是整体评分的主要贡献者,并且是唯一随ARDS严重程度显著增加的评分。然而,后侧评分在诊断ARDS方面比整体评分表现更差,使用最佳临界值时其阳性预测值仅为50(41 - 59)%。前外侧联合评分与整体评分表现相当(AUROC为0.91[0.85 - 0.97] vs. 0.91[0.86 - 0.95])。
虽然后侧评分随ARDS严重程度增加,但其对ARDS的诊断准确性因信噪比不佳而受到影响。一个8区域的“前外侧”评分与整体评分表现相当,可能有助于排除接受有创通气的ICU患者中的ARDS。