TY - JOUR
T1 - The utility of lung ultrasound in COVID-19
T2 - A systematic scoping review
AU - Trauer, Michael M.
AU - Matthies, Ashley
AU - Mani, Nick
AU - McDermott, Cian
AU - Jarman, Robert
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2020.
PY - 2020/11/1
Y1 - 2020/11/1
N2 - Introduction: Lung ultrasound (LUS) has an established evidence base and has proven useful in previous viral epidemics. An understanding of the utility of LUS in COVID-19 is crucial to determine its most suitable role based on local circumstances. Method: Online databases, specialist websites and social media platforms were searched to identify studies that explore the utility of LUS in COVID-19. Case reports and recommendations were excluded. Findings: In total, 33 studies were identified which represent a rapidly expanding evidence base for LUS in COVID-19. The quality of the included studies was relatively low; however, LUS certainly appears to be a highly sensitive and fairly specific test for COVID-19 in all ages and in pregnancy. Discussion: There may be LUS findings and patterns that are relatively specific to COVID-19; however, specificity may also be influenced by factors such as disease severity, pre-existing lung disease, operator experience, disease prevalence and the reference standard. Conclusion: LUS is almost certainly more sensitive than chest radiograph for COVID-19 and has several advantages over computed tomography and real-time polymerase chain reaction. High-quality research is needed into various aspects of LUS including: diagnostic accuracy in undifferentiated patients; triage and prognostication; monitoring progression and guiding interventions; the persistence of residual LUS findings; inter-observer agreement and the role of contrast-enhanced LUS.
AB - Introduction: Lung ultrasound (LUS) has an established evidence base and has proven useful in previous viral epidemics. An understanding of the utility of LUS in COVID-19 is crucial to determine its most suitable role based on local circumstances. Method: Online databases, specialist websites and social media platforms were searched to identify studies that explore the utility of LUS in COVID-19. Case reports and recommendations were excluded. Findings: In total, 33 studies were identified which represent a rapidly expanding evidence base for LUS in COVID-19. The quality of the included studies was relatively low; however, LUS certainly appears to be a highly sensitive and fairly specific test for COVID-19 in all ages and in pregnancy. Discussion: There may be LUS findings and patterns that are relatively specific to COVID-19; however, specificity may also be influenced by factors such as disease severity, pre-existing lung disease, operator experience, disease prevalence and the reference standard. Conclusion: LUS is almost certainly more sensitive than chest radiograph for COVID-19 and has several advantages over computed tomography and real-time polymerase chain reaction. High-quality research is needed into various aspects of LUS including: diagnostic accuracy in undifferentiated patients; triage and prognostication; monitoring progression and guiding interventions; the persistence of residual LUS findings; inter-observer agreement and the role of contrast-enhanced LUS.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85089584731&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/1742271X20950779
DO - 10.1177/1742271X20950779
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85089584731
SN - 1742-271X
VL - 28
SP - 208
EP - 222
JO - Ultrasound
JF - Ultrasound
IS - 4
ER -