Lung ultrasonography in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis evaluation of a simplified protocol with high-resolution computed tomographic correlation

14Citations
Citations of this article
27Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objectives—To compare a simplified ultrasonographic (US) protocol in 2 patient positions with the same-positioned comprehensive US assessments and high-resolution computed tomographic (CT) findings in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Methods—Twenty-five consecutive patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis were prospectively enrolled and examined in 2 sessions. During session 1, patients were examined with a US protocol including 56 lung intercostal spaces in supine/ sitting (supine/sitting comprehensive protocol) and lateral decubitus (decubitus comprehensive protocol) positions. During session 2, patients were evaluated with a 16-intercostal space US protocol in sitting (sitting simplified protocol) and left/ right decubitus (decubitus simplified protocol) positions. The 16 intercostal spaces were chosen according to the prevalence of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis-related changes on high-resolution CT. The sum of B-lines counted in each intercostal space formed the US scores for all 4 US protocols: supine/sitting and decubitus comprehensive US scores and sitting and decubitus simplified US scores. High-resolution CT-related Warrick scores (J Rheumatol 1991; 18:1520-1528) were compared to US scores. The duration of each protocol was recorded. Results—A significant correlation was found between all US scores and Warrick scores and between simplified and corresponding comprehensive scores (P

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Vassalou, E. E., Raissaki, M., Magkanas, E., Antoniou, K. M., & Karantanas, A. H. (2018). Lung ultrasonography in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis evaluation of a simplified protocol with high-resolution computed tomographic correlation. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine, 37(3), 689–696. https://doi.org/10.1002/jum.14406

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free