Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2019 Mar 1;2(3):e190703.
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.0703.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Point-of-Care Lung Ultrasonography and Chest Radiography in Adults With Symptoms Suggestive of Acute Decompensated Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Anna M Maw  1 , Ahmed Hassanin  1 , P Michael Ho  2   3 , Matthew D F McInnes  4   5 , Angela Moss  6 , Elizabeth Juarez-Colunga  6   7 , Nilam J Soni  8   9 , Marcelo H Miglioranza  10 , Elke Platz  11   12 , Kristen DeSanto  13 , Anthony P Sertich  14 , Gerald Salame  1 , Stacie L Daugherty  2   6
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Diagnostic Accuracy of Point-of-Care Lung Ultrasonography and Chest Radiography in Adults With Symptoms Suggestive of Acute Decompensated Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Anna M Maw et al. JAMA Netw Open. .

Abstract

Importance: Standard tools used to diagnose pulmonary edema in acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF), including chest radiography (CXR), lack adequate sensitivity, which may delay appropriate diagnosis and treatment. Point-of-care lung ultrasonography (LUS) may be more accurate than CXR, but no meta-analysis of studies directly comparing the 2 tools was previously available.

Objective: To compare the accuracy of LUS with the accuracy of CXR in the diagnosis of cardiogenic pulmonary edema in adult patients presenting with dyspnea.

Data sources: A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases and the gray literature was performed in May 2018. No language or year limits were applied.

Study selection: Study inclusion criteria were a prospective adult cohort of patients presenting to any clinical setting with dyspnea who underwent both LUS and CXR on initial assessment with imaging results compared with a reference standard ADHF diagnosis by a clinical expert after either a medical record review or a combination of echocardiography findings and brain-type natriuretic peptide criteria. Two reviewers independently assessed the studies for inclusion criteria, and disagreements were resolved with discussion.

Data extraction and synthesis: Reporting adhered to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias using a customized QUADAS-2 tool. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of LUS and CXR were determined using a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic approach.

Main outcomes and measures: The comparative accuracy of LUS and CXR in diagnosing ADHF as measured by the differences between the 2 modalities in pooled sensitivity and specificity.

Results: The literature search yielded 1377 nonduplicate titles that were screened, of which 43 articles (3.1%) underwent full-text review. Six studies met the inclusion criteria, representing a total of 1827 patients. Pooled estimates for LUS were 0.88 (95% Cl, 0.75-0.95) for sensitivity and 0.90 (95% Cl, 0.88-0.92) for specificity. Pooled estimates for CXR were 0.73 (95% CI, 0.70-0.76) for sensitivity and 0.90 (95% CI, 0.75-0.97) for specificity. The relative sensitivity ratio of LUS, compared with CXR, was 1.2 (95% CI, 1.08-1.34; P < .001), but no difference was found in specificity between tests (relative specificity ratio, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.90-1.11; P = .96).

Conclusions and relevance: The findings suggest that LUS is more sensitive than CXR in detecting pulmonary edema in ADHF; LUS should be considered as an adjunct imaging modality in the evaluation of patients with dyspnea at risk of ADHF.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Flow Diagram Outlining Search Through Inclusion Process
CXR indicates chest radiography.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Forest Plots for Lung Ultrasonography and Chest Radiography
CXR indicates chest radiography; LUS, lung ultrasonography.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Ray P, Birolleau S, Lefort Y, et al. . Acute respiratory failure in the elderly: etiology, emergency diagnosis and prognosis. Crit Care. 2006;10(3):. doi:10.1186/cc4926 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rui PKK. National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 2014. emergency department summary tables. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhamcs/web_tables/2014_ed_web_tables.pdf. Accessed June 14, 2018.
    1. Yancy CW, Jessup M, Bozkurt B, et al. ; Writing Committee Members; American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines . 2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of heart failure: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines. Circulation. 2013;128(16):e240-. doi:10.1161/CIR.0b013e31829e8776 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ponikowski P, Voors AA, Anker SD, et al. . 2016 ESC Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute and Chronic Heart Failure. Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 2016;69(12):1167. doi:10.1016/j.rec.2016.11.005 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Matsue Y, Damman K, Voors AA, et al. . Time-to-furosemide treatment and mortality in patients hospitalized with acute heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;69(25):3042-3051. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2017.04.042 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types