First comes the A, then the B: what we learned from the COVID-19 outbreak

The Role of POCUS to Face COVID-19: A Narrative Review

COVID-19 has been a challenging outbreak to face, with millions of deaths among the globe. Acute respiratory failure due to interstitial pneumonia was the leading cause of death other than prothrombotic activation and complications. Lung ultrasound (LUS) and point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) are widely used not only to triage, to identify, and to monitor lungs involvement but also to assess hemodynamic status and thrombotic and hemorrhagic complications, mainly in critically ill patients. POCUS has gained growing consideration due to its bedside utilization, reliability, and reproducibility even in emergency settings especially in unstable patients. In this narrative review, we aim to describe LUS and POCUS utilization in COVID-19 infection based on the literature found on this topic. We reported the LUS patterns of COVID-19 pulmonary infection, the diagnostic accuracy with respect to CT lung scan, its prognostic value, the variety of scores and protocols proposed, and the utilization of POCUS to investigate the extra-lung complications.

Can Lung Ultrasound Be the Ideal Monitoring Tool to Predict the Clinical Outcome of Mechanically Ventilated COVID-19 Patients? An Observational Study

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, lung ultrasound (LUS) has been widely used since it can be performed at the patient’s bedside, does not produce ionizing radiation, and is sufficiently accurate. The LUS score allows for quantifying lung involvement; however, its clinical prognostic role is still controversial. Methods: A retrospective observational study on 103 COVID-19 patients with respiratory failure that were assessed with an LUS score at intensive care unit (ICU) admission and discharge in a tertiary university COVID-19 referral center. Results: The deceased patients had a higher LUS score at admission than the survivors (25.7 vs. 23.5; p-value = 0.02; cut-off value of 25; Odds Ratio (OR) 1.1; Interquartile Range (IQR) 1.0−1.2). The predictive regression model shows that the value of LUSt0 (OR 1.1; IQR 1.0–1.3), age (OR 1.1; IQR 1.0−1.2), sex (OR 0.7; IQR 0.2−3.6), and days in spontaneous breathing (OR 0.2; IQR 0.1–0.5) predict the risk of death for COVID-19 patients (Area under the Curve (AUC) 0.92). Furthermore, the surviving patients showed a significantly lower difference between LUS scores at admission and discharge (mean difference of 1.75, p-value = 0.03). Conclusion: Upon entry into the ICU, the LUS score may play a prognostic role in COVID-19 patients with ARDS. Furthermore, employing the LUS score as a monitoring tool allows for evaluating the patients with a higher probability of survival.

Lung ultrasound in ruling out COVID-19 pneumonia in the ED: a multicentre prospective sensitivity study

PURPOSE

Early diagnosis of COVID-19 has a crucial role in confining the spread among the population. Lung ultrasound (LUS) was included in the diagnostic pathway for its high sensitivity, low costs, non-invasiveness and safety. We aimed to test the sensitivity of LUS to rule out COVID-19 pneumonia (COVIDp) in a population of patients with suggestive symptoms.

METHODS

Multicentre prospective observational study in three EDs in Northeastern Italy during the first COVID-19 outbreak. A convenience sample of 235 patients admitted to the ED for symptoms suggestive COVIDp (fever, cough or shortness of breath) from 17 March 2020 to 26 April 2020 was enrolled. All patients underwent a sequential assessment involving: clinical examination, LUS, CXR and arterial blood gas. The index test under investigation was a standardised protocol of LUS compared with a pragmatic composite reference standard constituted by: clinical gestalt, real-time PCR test, radiological and blood gas results. Of the 235 enrolled patients, 90 were diagnosed with COVIDp according to the reference standard.

RESULTS

Among the patients with suspected COVIDp, the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 was 38.3%. The sensitivity of LUS for diagnosing COVIDp was 85.6% (95% CI 76.6% to 92.1%); the specificity was 91.7% (95% CI 86.0% to 95.7%). The positive predictive value and the negative predictive value were 86.5% (95%CI 78.8% to 91.7%) and 91.1% (95% CI 86.1% to 94.4%) respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of LUS for COVIDp was 89.4% (95% CI 84.7% to 93.0%). The positive likelihood ratio was 10.3 (95% CI 6.0 to 17.9), and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.16 (95% CI 0.1 to 0.3).

CONCLUSION

In a population with high SARS-CoV-2 prevalence, LUS has a high sensitivity (and negative predictive value) enough to rule out COVIDp in patients with suggestive symptoms. The role of LUS in diagnosing patients with COVIDp is perhaps even more promising. Nevertheless, further research with adequately powered studies is needed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04370275.

A simple prognostic score based on troponin and presepsin for COVID-19 patients admitted to the emergency department: a single-center pilot study

BACKGROUND

The need to determine prognostic factors that can predict a particularly severe or, conversely, the benign course of COVID-19 is particularly perceived in the Emergency Department (ED), considering the scarcity of resources for a conspicuous mass of patients. The aim of our study was to identify some predictors for 30-day mortality among some clinical, laboratory, and ultrasound variables in a COVID-19 patients population.

METHODS

Prospective single-center pilot study conducted in an ED of a University Hospital. A consecutive sample of confirmed COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure was enrolled from March 8th to April 15th, 2020.

RESULTS

143 patients were enrolled. Deceased patients (n = 65) were older (81 vs. 61 years, p <0.001), and they had more frequently a history of heart disease, neurological disease, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (p-values = 0.026, 0.025, and 0.034, respectively) than survived patients. Troponin I and presepsin had a significant correlation with a worse outcome. Troponin achieved a sensitivity of 77% and a specificity of 82% for a cut-off value of 27.6 ng/L. The presepsin achieved a sensitivity of 54% and a specificity of 92% for a cut-off value of 871 pg/mL.

CONCLUSION

In a population of COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory failure in an ED, presepsin and troponin I are accurate predictors of 30-day mortality. Presepsin is highly specific and could permit the early identification of patients who could benefit from more intensive care as soon as they enter the ED. Further validation studies are needed to confirm this result.

Lung Ultrasonography in Ruling Out COVID-19 Among Health Care Workers in Two Italian Emergency Departments: A Multicenter Study

Objective:

The low sensitivity of the real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) test on the nasopharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV2 virus could cause infections among health care professionals and could be a source of viral spread. The aim of this study was to verify whether lung ultrasonography (LUS) had a negative predictive value (NPV) high enough to rule out coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in a cohort of health care employees, working in emergency departments (EDs).

Materials and Methods:

A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted in two EDs in Northeast Italy. An adjudication committee established the definitive diagnosis of COVID-19.

Results:

A cohort was enrolled of 155 possible patient cases (two true positives). Twenty-one health care employees presented with suggestive symptoms for COVID-19. The rRT-PCR test was positive in one of the two patients. LUS was suggestive for COVID-19 pneumonia in four patients. The diagnostic accuracy of LUS was 98.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 95.4%–99.8%). The NPV was 100% (95% CI = 100%–100%).

Conclusion:

LUS has a high enough NPV for excluding a COVID-19-related pneumonia in a cohort of health care employees who were exposed to the SARS-CoV2 virus.