J Ultrasound Med. 2021 Oct 26. doi: 10.1002/jum.15849. Online ahead of print.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Safety precautions limit the clinical assessment of hospitalized Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. The minimal exposure required to perform lung ultrasound (LUS) paired with its high accuracy, reproducibility, and availability make it an attractive solution for initial assessment of COVID-19 patients. We aim to evaluate whether the association between sonographic findings and clinical outcomes among COVID 19 patients is comparable between the validated 12-zone protocol and a shorter, 8-zone protocol, in which the posterior lung regions are omitted.
METHODS: One hundred and one COVID-19 patients hospitalized in a dedicated COVID-19 ward in a tertiary referral hospital were examined upon admission and scored by 2 LUS protocols. The association between the scores and a composite outcome consisting of death, transfer to the intensive care unit (ICU) or initiation of invasive or noninvasive mechanical ventilation was estimated and compared.
RESULTS: LUS scores in both the 8- and the 12-zone protocols were associated with the composite outcome during hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR] 1.21 [1.03-1.42, P = .022] and HR 1.13 [1.01-1.27, P = .037], respectively). The observed difference in the discriminatory ROC-AUC values for the 8- and 12-zone scores was not significant (0.767 and 0.754 [P = .647], respectively).
CONCLUSION: A short 8-zone LUS protocol is as accurate as the previously validated, 12-zone protocol for prognostication of clinical deterioration in nonventilated COVID-19 patients.
PMID:34698389 | DOI:10.1002/jum.15849