Lung ultrasound versus chest radiography for diagnosing pneumonia: A mini systematic review
1 Radiology department, Dr. Moewardi Public Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Sebelas Maret University, Surakarta, Indonesia.
2 Cardiovascular division, School of Medicine, Kobe University, Japan.
3 Radiology department, PKU Muhammadiyah Karanganyar Hospital, Indonesia.
Review Article
GSC Advanced Research and Reviews, 2021, 07(03), 122–125.
Article DOI: 10.30574/gscarr.2021.7.3.0131
Publication history:
Received on 18 May 2021; revised on 25 June 2021; accepted on 28 June 2021
Abstract:
Background: Pneumonia is a deadly disease which needs fast and correct examination and therapy. Some studies suggest that lung ultrasound could be useful and fast examination for diagnosing pneumonia. Furthermore, it has more favorable safety profile and lower cost than chest X-ray (CXR) and Computed Tomography (CT).
Objective: The aim of this study is to know accuracy of lung ultrasound versus chest radiography for diagnosing pneumonia and whether it can replace chest radiography as routine examination.
Methods: We made structured research on several databases including Science direct, Proquest, Pubmed, and EBSCO Host. The selected studies underwent critical appraisal based on Oxford CEEBM diagnostic study clinical appraisal.
Results: Six diagnostic studies comprising of 752 participants met inclusion criteria were critically appraised. Sensitivity of lung ultrasound in pneumonia is better than chest radiography (68%-98.5% vs. 47%-77.7%). Specificity of lung ultrasound is better than chest radiography in pneumonia (57%-98.5% vs. 59.5%-94%). All of studies showed lung ultrasound is better and statistically significant.
Conclusions: Our study indicates that lung ultrasound is better than chest radiography for diagnosing pneumonia and can become routine examination. It may represent a useful first-line approach for confirmation of clinical diagnosis.
Keywords:
Lung ultrasonography; Chest radiography; Pneumonia
Full text article in PDF:
Copyright information:
Copyright © 2021 Author(s) retain the copyright of this article. This article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Liscense 4.0