Abstract
Background. Lung ultrasonography (LUS) is a promising pragmatic risk-stratification tool in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study describes and compares LUS characteristics between patients with different clinical outcomes.
Methods. Prospective observational study of polymerase chain reaction-confirmed adults with COVID-19 with symptoms of lower respiratory tract infection in the emergency department (ED) of Lausanne University Hospital. A trained physician recorded LUS images using a standardized protocol. Two experts reviewed images blinded to patient outcome. We describe and compare early LUS findings (<= 24 hours of ED presentation) between patient groups based on their 7-day outcome (1) outpatients, (2) hospitalized, and (3) intubated/dead. Normalized LUS score was used to discriminate between groups.
Results. Between 6 March and 3 April 2020, we included 80 patients (17 outpatients, 42 hospitalized, and 21 intubated/dead). Seventy-three patients (91%) had abnormal LUS (70% outpatients, 95% hospitalized, and 100% intubated/dead; P = .003). The proportion of involved zones was lower in outpatients compared with other groups (median [IQR], 30% [0-40%], 44% [31-70%], 70% [50-88%]; P < .001). Predominant abnormal patterns were bilateral and there was multifocal spread thickening of the pleura with pleural line irregularities (70%), confluent B lines (60%), and pathologic B lines (50%). Posterior inferior zones were more often affected. Median normalized LUS score had a good level of discrimination between outpatients and others with area under the ROC of.80 (95% CI, .68-.92).
Conclusions. Systematic LUS has potential as a reliable, cheap, and easy-to-use triage tool for the early risk stratification in patients with COVID-19 presenting to EDs.
Methods. Prospective observational study of polymerase chain reaction-confirmed adults with COVID-19 with symptoms of lower respiratory tract infection in the emergency department (ED) of Lausanne University Hospital. A trained physician recorded LUS images using a standardized protocol. Two experts reviewed images blinded to patient outcome. We describe and compare early LUS findings (<= 24 hours of ED presentation) between patient groups based on their 7-day outcome (1) outpatients, (2) hospitalized, and (3) intubated/dead. Normalized LUS score was used to discriminate between groups.
Results. Between 6 March and 3 April 2020, we included 80 patients (17 outpatients, 42 hospitalized, and 21 intubated/dead). Seventy-three patients (91%) had abnormal LUS (70% outpatients, 95% hospitalized, and 100% intubated/dead; P = .003). The proportion of involved zones was lower in outpatients compared with other groups (median [IQR], 30% [0-40%], 44% [31-70%], 70% [50-88%]; P < .001). Predominant abnormal patterns were bilateral and there was multifocal spread thickening of the pleura with pleural line irregularities (70%), confluent B lines (60%), and pathologic B lines (50%). Posterior inferior zones were more often affected. Median normalized LUS score had a good level of discrimination between outpatients and others with area under the ROC of.80 (95% CI, .68-.92).
Conclusions. Systematic LUS has potential as a reliable, cheap, and easy-to-use triage tool for the early risk stratification in patients with COVID-19 presenting to EDs.