article · Frontiers in Medicine
Study aim: Evluate bedside lung ultrasound (LUS) diagnostic accuracy versus chest computed tomography (CT) in adult ICU patients with respiratory distress. Design and methods: Single-center, cross-sectional study of 200 paired LUS-CT examinations. LUS was performed within 12 h, scanning six zones per hemithorax and classifying findings into A-lines, C1 (pneumonia), C2 (atelectasis), B1, B2 (interstitial patterns), pleural effusion, and emphysema. Diagnostic performance metrics included sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, likelihood ratios, and ROC analysis. Key results: CT showed consolidations (60.5%), pleural effusions (42.5%), interstitial syndrome (28.5%), ground-glass opacities (26%), and emphysema (23.5%). LUS detected C1 in 66.5% (posterior-inferior predominance), B2 in 40.5%, B1 in 40%, pleural effusions in 38.5%, C2 in 13.5%, and emphysema in 16.5%. Overall concordance with CT was 81%. LUS had very high specificity for pleural effusion (Sp = 96.5%, PLR = 24.5, accuracy = 91.9%) and atelectasis (Sp = 93.7%, NPV = 97.6%, PLR = 12.6, accuracy = 92.3%), very high sensitivity for alveolar-interstitial syndrome (Se = 96.2%, NPV = 98.3%, NLR = 0.05), and good sensitivity for consolidations (Se = 89.3%). Conclusion: LUS is a reliable bedside tool that can reduce CT use, radiation exposure, and enable dynamic monitoring; structured training is essential.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2026.1724227
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.