TY - JOUR
T1 - The diagnostic performance of lung ultrasound for detecting COVID-19 in emergency departments
T2 - A systematic review and meta-analysis
AU - Jari, Reem
AU - Alfuraih, Abdulrahman M.
AU - McLaughlan, James R.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
PY - 2022/6
Y1 - 2022/6
N2 - Purpose: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of published literature investigating the use of lung ultrasound (LUS) on COVID-19 patients, in emergency point of care settings, and to determine its diagnostic value compared with lung computed tomography (LCT) diagnostic performance. Whilst using the real-time polymerase chain reaction test as the ‘gold standard’. Methods: Literature searches were performed on MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and PubMed databases for eligible studies. The LUS and LCT pooled diagnostic performance were measured using DerSimonian–Laird random effect method. Result: Out of a total of 158 studies, 16 met the eligibility criteria and were included in this review. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios were 86.9%, 62.4%, 2.4 and 0.19, respectively for LUS and 93.5%, 72.6%, 3.3 and 0.05, respectively for LCT. Conclusion: The lung ultrasound (LUS) demonstrated acceptable sensitivity but poor specificity when used independently to diagnose COVID-19 pneumonia patients in emergency departments, while the lung computed tomography showed higher performance. Thus, LUS can be used to supplement existing diagnostic tools and possibly for the triage of patients.
AB - Purpose: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of published literature investigating the use of lung ultrasound (LUS) on COVID-19 patients, in emergency point of care settings, and to determine its diagnostic value compared with lung computed tomography (LCT) diagnostic performance. Whilst using the real-time polymerase chain reaction test as the ‘gold standard’. Methods: Literature searches were performed on MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and PubMed databases for eligible studies. The LUS and LCT pooled diagnostic performance were measured using DerSimonian–Laird random effect method. Result: Out of a total of 158 studies, 16 met the eligibility criteria and were included in this review. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios were 86.9%, 62.4%, 2.4 and 0.19, respectively for LUS and 93.5%, 72.6%, 3.3 and 0.05, respectively for LCT. Conclusion: The lung ultrasound (LUS) demonstrated acceptable sensitivity but poor specificity when used independently to diagnose COVID-19 pneumonia patients in emergency departments, while the lung computed tomography showed higher performance. Thus, LUS can be used to supplement existing diagnostic tools and possibly for the triage of patients.
KW - COVID-19
KW - lung computed tomography
KW - lung ultrasound
KW - meta-analysis
KW - systematic review
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85125993588&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/jcu.23184
DO - 10.1002/jcu.23184
M3 - Review article
C2 - 35261033
AN - SCOPUS:85125993588
SN - 0091-2751
VL - 50
SP - 618
EP - 627
JO - Journal of Clinical Ultrasound
JF - Journal of Clinical Ultrasound
IS - 5
ER -