Search

Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has been established as an essential bedside tool for real-time image guidance of invasive procedures in critically ill neonates and children. While procedural guidance using POCUS has become the standard of care across many adult medicine subspecialties, its use has more recently gained popularity in neonatal and pediatric medicine due in part to improvement in technology and integration of POCUS into physician training programs. With increasing use, emerging data have supported its adoption and shown improvement in pediatric outcomes. Procedures that have traditionally relied on physical landmarks, such as thoracentesis and lumbar puncture, can now be performed under direct visualization using POCUS, increasing success, and reducing complications in our most vulnerable patients. In this review, we describe a global and comprehensive use of POCUS to assist all steps of different non-vascular invasive procedures and the evidence base to support such approach. Conclusion: There has been a recent growth of supportive evidence for using point-of-care ultrasound to guide neonatal and pediatric percutaneous procedural interventions. A global and comprehensive approach for the use of point-of-care ultrasound allows to assist all steps of different, non-vascular, invasive procedures. What is Known: • Point-of-care ultrasound has been established as a powerful tool providing for real-time image guidance of invasive procedures in critically ill neonates and children and allowing to increase both safety and success. What is New: • A global and comprehensive use of point-of-care ultrasound allows to assist all steps of different, non-vascular, invasive procedures: from diagnosis to semi-quantitative assessment, and from real-time puncture to follow-up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In critically ill patients with acute respiratory failure, thoracic images are essential for evaluating the nature, extent and progression of the disease, and for clinical management decisions. For this purpose, computed tomography (CT) is the gold standard. However, transporting patients to the radiology suite and exposure to ionized radiation limit its use. Furthermore, a CT scan is a static diagnostic exam for the thorax, not allowing, for example, appreciation of "lung sliding". Its use is also unsuitable when it is necessary to adapt or decide to modify mechanical ventilation parameters at the bedside in real-time. Therefore, chest X-ray and lung ultrasound are today's contenders for shared second place on the podium to acquire a thoracic image, with their specific strengths and limitations. Finally, electrical impedance tomography (EIT) could soon have a role, however, its assessment is outside the scope of this review. Thus, we aim to carry out the following points: (1) analyze the advancement in knowledge of lung ultrasound use and the related main protocols adopted in intensive care units (ICUs) over the latest 30 years, reporting the principal publications along the way, (2) discuss how and when lung ultrasound should be used in a modern ICU and (3) illustrate the possible future development of LUS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Childhood pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) diagnosis is often a challenge that requires a combination of history, clinical, radiological, immunological and microbiological findings. Radiological diagnosis is based today on the use of chest X-ray and chest CT that, in addition to being radio-invasive tools for children, are often not available in countries with low-resources. A non-invasive, easily usable and reproducible, low-cost diagnostic tool as LUS would therefore be useful to use to support the diagnosis of childhood PTB. Data on the use of LUS for the diagnosis and follow-up of childhood PTB are limited and in some respects contradictory. To help better define the potential role of LUS we have described the pros and cons of lung ultrasound method through a brief review of the studies in the literature and reporting some case series in which we describe clinical, laboratory, radiological results as well as detailed lung ultrasound findings of four children/adolescents with PTB. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. To evaluate relationships between lung aeration assessed by lung ultrasound (LUS) with viscoelastic profiles obtained by thromboelastography (TEG) in COVID-19 respiratory failure. Methods. Retrospective analysis in a tertiary ICU in Rome, Italy. Forty invasively ventilated adults with COVID-19 underwent LUS and TEG assessment. A simplified LUS protocol consisting in scanning six areas, three per side, was adopted. A score from 0 to 3 was assigned to each area. TEG®6s was used to obtain viscoelastic hemostatic assay parameters which were compared to LUS score. Results. There was a significant inverse correlation between LUS score and static compliance of the respiratory system (Crs, rs −0.75; p < 0.001). We found a significant association between LUS and functional fibrinogen maximum amplitude (FF-MA): among 18 patients with LUS score ≤ 12, median FF-MA was 31 mm [IQR 28–39] whilst, among 22 patients with LUS score > 12, it was 46.3 mm [IQR 40–53], p = 0.0004. Median of the citrated recalcified kaolin-activated maximum amplitude (CK-MA) was 66.1 mm [64.4–68] in the LUS score ≤ 12 group, and 69.6 [68.5–70.7] when LUS score > 12, p < 0.002. Conclusions. The hypercoagulable profile as defined by elevated FF-MA and CK-MA may be associated with a low degree of lung aeration as assessed by LUS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study aims to ascertain whether (1) an educational program is sufficient to achieve adequate Diaphragm Ultrasound (DUS) assessments on healthy volunteers and (2) combining a video tutorial with a practical session is more effective in making learners capable to obtain accurate DUS measurements, as opposed to sole video tutorial. Results: We enrolledstep 1: 172 volunteers naïve to ultrasound. After watching a video tutorial, a questionnaire was administered and considered to be passed when at least 70% of the questions were correctly answered. Course participants who passed the theoretical test were randomized to either intervention or control group. Learners randomized to the interventional group underwent to a practical training, tutored by an expert, before accessing DUS examination. Participants randomized to the control group directly accessed DUS examination, without any practical training. DUS measurements by learners and tutors were recorded and checked for accuracy, according to predefined criteria. Detection of both acoustic windows and accurate DUS assessment was achieved by 83.7% learners of the intervention group while 3.5% only among controls (p < 0.0001). The subcostal view of the diaphragm was correctly identified by 92% and 65% learners in the intervention and control groups, respectively (p < 0.0001) while the apposition zone by 86% and 71% learners, respectively (p = 0.026). An accurate diaphragm displacement (DD) measurement was obtained by 91% and 45% learners in the intervention and control groups, respectively (p < 0.0001) while an accurate thickening fraction (TF) measurement by 99% and 21%, respectively (p < 0.0001). DD measurements by both groups of learners were significantly correlated with those assessed by expert tutors; however, a significant improvement of measurement accuracy was found in learners randomized to receive also the practical training, compared to controls. Conclusions: A combined approach consisting of a theoretical module followed by a practical training is more effective in managing acoustic windows and performing accurate measurements when compared to an exclusively theoretical course. Trial registration prospectively registered on clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier: NCT03704129; release date 17th October 2018). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lung ultrasound (LUS) has recently been advocated as an accurate tool to diagnose coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia. However, reports on its use are based mainly on hypothesis studies, case reports or small retrospective case series, while the prognostic role of LUS in COVID-19 patients has not yet been established. We conducted a prospective study aimed at assessing the ability of LUS to predict mortality and intensive care unit admission of COVID-19 patients evaluated in a tertiary level emergency department. Patients in our sample had a median of 6 lung areas with pathologic findings (inter-quartile range [IQR]: 6, range: 0-14), defined as a score different from 0. The median rate of lung areas involved was 71% (IQR: 64%, range: 0-100), while the median average score was 1.14 (IQR: 0.93, range: 0-3). A higher rate of pathologic lung areas and a higher average score were significantly associated with death, with an estimated difference of 40.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4%-68%, p = 0.01) and of 0.47 (95% CI: 0.06-0.93, p = 0.02), respectively. Similarly, the same parameters were associated with a significantly higher risk of intensive care unit admission with estimated differences of 29% (95% CI: 8%-50%, p = 0.008) and 0.47 (95% CI: 0.05-0.93, p = 0.02), respectively. Our study indicates that LUS is able to detect COVID-19 pneumonia and to predict, during the first evaluation in the emergency department, patients at risk for intensive care unit admission and death. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]