Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Lung ultrasound (LUS) has proven high diagnostic accuracy for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in developed countries. However, its diagnostic performance in resource-limited settings with high pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) incidence is less established. Additionally, the role of LUS in monitoring CAP progression remains underexplored.ObjectivesTo validate the diagnostic performance, monitoring and prognostic utility of LUS for CAP in a high pulmonary TB incidence setting.DesignProspective single-centre cohort study.SettingPulmonary department of a tertiary hospital in Vietnam.ParticipantsA total of 158 patients suspected of having CAP were enrolled, with 136 (mean age 62 years, 72.8% male) included in the final analysis.InterventionsPatients underwent LUS and chest X-ray (CXR) within 24 hours of admission, with a follow-up LUS on days 5-8.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary outcome was the diagnostic accuracy of LUS and CXR compared with discharge diagnosis. Secondary outcomes included the accuracy compared with CT scan results, changes in LUS parameters-consolidation size, number and Lung Ultrasound Score (LUSS)-and their association with in-hospital mortality.ResultsLUS demonstrated higher sensitivity than CXR (96.0% (95% CI 90.0% to 99.0%) vs 82.8% (95% CI 73.9% to 89.7%)). LUS specificity was 64.9% (95% CI 47.5% to 80.0%), compared with 54.1% (95% CI 36.9% to 70.5%) for CXR. The moderate specificity for LUS was due to sonographic-similar conditions, notably TB in 5.1% of patients. Consolidation size and numbers showed marginal resolution, while LUSS showed more pronounced decreases over time. The baseline LUSS showed limited discriminative ability for predicting mortality (area under the curve, AUC 0.65, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.75), while follow-up LUSS and changes in LUSS (ΔLUSS) demonstrated higher levels of discrimination (AUC 0.81 (95% CI 0.71 to 0.89) and 0.89 (95% CI 0.80 to 0.95), respectively). For each one-point increase in ΔLUSS, the odds of in-hospital mortality went up by 70% (p=0.002). An improved LUSS effectively ruled out mortality (negative predictive value 97.4%).ConclusionAlthough LUS is highly sensitive for diagnosing CAP, its specificity in TB-endemic regions warrants further caution. Serial LUS assessments, particularly monitoring LUSS changes, are valuable for tracking disease progression and prognostication, with increasing LUSS indicating potential clinical deterioration.

Original publication

DOI

10.1136/bmjopen-2024-094799

Type

Journal

BMJ open

Publication Date

04/2025

Volume

15

Addresses

Department of Internal Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh City, Ho Chi Minh, Viet Nam.

Keywords

Lung, Humans, Tuberculosis, Pulmonary, Community-Acquired Infections, Pneumonia, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Ultrasonography, Prognosis, Hospital Mortality, Sensitivity and Specificity, Prospective Studies, Endemic Diseases, Adult, Aged, Middle Aged, Vietnam, Female, Male