Nelson Mathew, Chavda Yash, Stankard Brendon, McCann-Pineo Molly, Nello Alexander, Jersey Andrew
Department of Emergency Medicine, North Shore University Hospital, Manhasset, New York.
J Emerg Med. 2022 Oct;63(4):528-532. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2022.08.004. Epub 2022 Oct 13.
Chest injury can result in life-threatening complications like tension pneumothorax, in which rapid deterioration can occur without decompression. Traditionally, the second intercostal space (ICS) along the mid-clavicular line is taught as the site for decompression. However, this has been questioned due to high rates of treatment failure. The fifth ICS on the mid-axillary line (MAL) is hypothesized to have a shorter distance from skin to pleura based on recent studies.
The purpose of this study was to use point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) to compare chest wall thickness at these two locations. The primary objective was to evaluate the distance from skin to pleura line at the second ICS along the mid-clavicular line and the fifth ICS along the MAL. Secondarily, we aimed to evaluate inter-rater reliability of the two assessments.
This was a single-center, observational, pilot study. POCUS was performed using a linear transducer. Measurements of skin to pleura line were obtained at the right second ICS and fifth ICS. These measurements were then repeated by a blinded second ultrasonographer. Intraclass correlations (ICCs) for each measurement site were calculated to determine the inter-rater reliability.
Ninety-three percent of volunteers had a smaller chest wall distance at the fifth ICS-MAL. The median distance at the second and fifth ICS was 2.28 cm and 1.80 cm. The ICC for second ICS was 0.75 (95% CI 0.54-0.87), and 0.90 for the fifth ICS (95% CI 0.81-0.95), both indicating good reliability.
The data support that patients have a smaller chest wall distance at the fifth ICS vs. the second ICS. We support performing needle decompression at the fifth ICS and believe POCUS can be used to determine the optimal location for decompression.
胸部损伤可导致危及生命的并发症,如张力性气胸,若不进行减压,病情会迅速恶化。传统上,沿锁骨中线的第二肋间(ICS)被视为减压部位。然而,由于治疗失败率较高,这一方法受到了质疑。根据最近的研究推测,腋中线(MAL)的第五肋间从皮肤到胸膜的距离较短。
本研究旨在使用床旁超声(POCUS)比较这两个位置的胸壁厚度。主要目的是评估沿锁骨中线的第二肋间和沿腋中线的第五肋间从皮肤到胸膜线的距离。其次,我们旨在评估这两种评估方法的评分者间信度。
这是一项单中心、观察性的试点研究。使用线性探头进行床旁超声检查。在右侧第二肋间和第五肋间测量从皮肤到胸膜线的距离。然后由另一位不知情的超声检查人员重复这些测量。计算每个测量部位的组内相关系数(ICC)以确定评分者间信度。
93%的志愿者在腋中线第五肋间的胸壁距离较小。第二肋间和第五肋间的中位距离分别为2.28厘米和1.80厘米。第二肋间的ICC为0.75(95%可信区间0.54 - 0.87),第五肋间的ICC为0.90(95%可信区间0.81 - 0.95),两者均表明信度良好。
数据支持第五肋间的胸壁距离比第二肋间小。我们支持在第五肋间进行针吸减压,并认为床旁超声可用于确定减压的最佳位置。