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
Observational Study
. 2020 Jan 13;24(1):14.
doi: 10.1186/s13054-019-2719-8.

Should the ultrasound probe replace your stethoscope? A SICS-I sub-study comparing lung ultrasound and pulmonary auscultation in the critically ill

Collaborators, Affiliations
Observational Study

Should the ultrasound probe replace your stethoscope? A SICS-I sub-study comparing lung ultrasound and pulmonary auscultation in the critically ill

Eline G M Cox et al. Crit Care. .

Abstract

Background: In critically ill patients, auscultation might be challenging as dorsal lung fields are difficult to reach in supine-positioned patients, and the environment is often noisy. In recent years, clinicians have started to consider lung ultrasound as a useful diagnostic tool for a variety of pulmonary pathologies, including pulmonary edema. The aim of this study was to compare lung ultrasound and pulmonary auscultation for detecting pulmonary edema in critically ill patients.

Methods: This study was a planned sub-study of the Simple Intensive Care Studies-I, a single-center, prospective observational study. All acutely admitted patients who were 18 years and older with an expected ICU stay of at least 24 h were eligible for inclusion. All patients underwent clinical examination combined with lung ultrasound, conducted by researchers not involved in patient care. Clinical examination included auscultation of the bilateral regions for crepitations and rhonchi. Lung ultrasound was conducted according to the Bedside Lung Ultrasound in Emergency protocol. Pulmonary edema was defined as three or more B lines in at least two (bilateral) scan sites. An agreement was described by using the Cohen κ coefficient, sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, positive predictive value, and overall accuracy. Subgroup analysis were performed in patients who were not mechanically ventilated.

Results: The Simple Intensive Care Studies-I cohort included 1075 patients, of whom 926 (86%) were eligible for inclusion in this analysis. Three hundred seven of the 926 patients (33%) fulfilled the criteria for pulmonary edema on lung ultrasound. In 156 (51%) of these patients, auscultation was normal. A total of 302 patients (32%) had audible crepitations or rhonchi upon auscultation. From 130 patients with crepitations, 86 patients (66%) had pulmonary edema on lung ultrasound, and from 209 patients with rhonchi, 96 patients (46%) had pulmonary edema on lung ultrasound. The agreement between auscultation findings and lung ultrasound diagnosis was poor (κ statistic 0.25). Subgroup analysis showed that the diagnostic accuracy of auscultation was better in non-ventilated than in ventilated patients.

Conclusion: The agreement between lung ultrasound and auscultation is poor.

Trial registration: NCT02912624. Registered on September 23, 2016.

Keywords: Auscultation; Clinical examination; Critical care; Diagnostic accuracy; Lung ultrasound; Prospective study; Pulmonary edema.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The six scan sites according to the BLUE-protocol [18]
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Flowchart. Less than two scan sites meaning if less than two out of six scan sites or no bilateral scan sites of LUS were available, the presence of pulmonary edema could not be assessed

References

    1. Assaad S, Kratzert WB, Shelley B, Friedman MB, Perrino A. Assessment of pulmonary edema: principles and practice. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth WB Saunders. 2018;32:901–914. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2017.08.028. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mojoli F, Bouhemad B, Mongodi S, Lichtenstein D. Lung ultrasound for critically ill patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. Am Thorac Soc. 2019;199:701–714. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201802-0236CI. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Shrestha GS, Weeratunga D, Baker K. Point-of-care lung ultrasound in critically ill patients. Rev Recent Clin Trials. 2018;13:15–26. - PubMed
    1. Xirouchaki N, Magkanas E, Vaporidi K, Kondili E, Plataki M, Patrianakos A, et al. Lung ultrasound in critically ill patients: comparison with bedside chest radiography. Int Care Med. 2011;37:1488–1493. doi: 10.1007/s00134-011-2317-y. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Miglioranza MH, Picano E, Badano LP, Sant’Anna R, Rover M, Zaffaroni F, et al. Pulmonary congestion evaluated by lung ultrasound predicts decompensation in heart failure outpatients. Int J Cardiol. 2017;240:271–278. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2017.02.150. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data