Skip to main content
Critical Care logoLink to Critical Care
letter
. 2024 Sep 17;28:307. doi: 10.1186/s13054-024-05075-y

Lung ultrasound and ARDS: global collaboration is the way to go

Marry R Smit 1,2,3,4,5, Maud Boumans 1,2,3,4,5, William Aerts 1,2,3,4,5, Pieter R Tuinman 1,2,3,4,5,
PMCID: PMC11406768  PMID: 39289755

Abstract

We would like to extend our gratitude to Dr. da Hora Passos et al. for their interest in our recently published review and meta-analysis in Critical Care. In this response, we will elaborate on the points raised by the authors. We agree with the authors that LUS, like any other diagnostic technique, is valuable and safe only when utilized by trained operators. The authors expressed uncertainty regarding the sensitivity of LUS in detecting mild ARDS or ARDS at an early stage. This variance in sensitivity is more likely due to diversity in diagnostic thresholds. We advocate for global collaboration among LUS experts to align LUS methodologies and strengthen the evidence supporting LUS in the diagnosis of ARDS and its morphological subphenotypes.

Reply to Da Hora Passos et al.

We would like to extend our gratitude to Dr. da Hora Passos et al. [1] for their interest in our recently published review and meta-analysis in Critical Care [2]. We appreciate that the authors share our enthusiasm for the clinical application of lung ultrasound (LUS) in diagnosing acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and concur that ongoing research remains imperative. In this response, we will elaborate on the points raised by the authors.

We agree with the authors that LUS, like any other diagnostic technique, is valuable and safe only when utilized by trained operators. Although several studies have demonstrated that LUS is relatively quick to learn, there is a pressing need to standardize training protocols to ensure that current literature can be effectively applied in clinical practice. Efforts to establish international consensus on LUS and to estimate interobserver agreement for LUS diagnosis of ARDS among various groups of operators will guide future progress.

The authors express uncertainty regarding the sensitivity of LUS in detecting mild ARDS or ARDS at an early stage. We, however, question whether these concerns are indeed significant. While detecting mild ARDS is inherently more complex than severe ARDS, LUS is generally known to be a highly sensitive technique and is unlikely to be less sensitive than chest radiography or substantially less sensitive than chest computed tomography [3]. The variance in sensitivity found in our review is, in our view, more likely due to diversity in diagnostic thresholds rather than an inherent limitation of LUS. For instance, one of the larger studies included in our meta-analysis demonstrated that LUS can diagnose or exclude ARDS with certainty using different thresholds [4]. Future studies need to adopt coherent approaches to determine optimal diagnostic thresholds. Regarding early diagnosis of ARDS, our review included larger studies where LUS was performed early during the ICU stay [4] or even in the ward or emergency department settings [5, 6]. Thus, we are confident in the capacity of LUS to detect ARDS also at an early stage.

The ability of LUS to differentiate between focal and non-focal subphenotypes is highly promising, as demonstrated by current studies, one of which has been externally validated [7]. However, we agree with the authors that current retrospective studies necessitate prospective validation with an adequate sample size.

Finally, we advocate for global collaboration among LUS experts to align LUS methodologies and strengthen the evidence supporting LUS in the diagnosis of ARDS and its morphological subphenotypes.

Marry R. Smit.

Maud Boumans.

William Aerts.

Pieter R. Tuinman.

Abbreviations

ARDS

Acute respiratory distress syndrome

LUS

Lung ultrasound

Author contributions

M.S. and P.R.T. wrote the main manuscript textM.B. reviewed manuscript text and provided referencesW.A. reviewed manuscript text and provided abstract.

Funding

None.

Data availability

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Footnotes

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

  • 1.Passos DH, da Cunha Lyrio R, Lourenço RM, de Almeida Figueiredo ID, Flato UA, Barbas CV, da Silva AA. Lus me up: elevating Ards diagnosis. Crit Care. 2024. 10.1186/s13054-024-05044-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Boumans MM, Aerts W, Pisani L, Bos LD, Smit MR, Tuinman PR. Diagnostic accuracy of lung ultrasound in diagnosis of Ards and identification of focal or non-focal ARDS subphenotypes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care. 2024. 10.1186/s13054-024-04985-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Winkler MH, Touw HR, van de Ven PM, Twisk J, Tuinman PR. Diagnostic accuracy of chest radiograph, and when concomitantly studied lung ultrasound, in critically ill patients with respiratory symptoms: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care Med. 2018. 10.1097/ccm.0000000000003129. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Smit MR, Hagens LA, Heijnen NF, Pisani L, Cherpanath TG, Dongelmans DA, de Grooth H-JS, Pierrakos C, Tuinman PR, Zimatore C, Paulus F, Schnabel RM, Schultz MJ, Bergmans DC, Bos LD, Bos LD, Hagens LA, Schultz MJ, Smit MR, Verschueren AR. Lung ultrasound prediction model for acute respiratory distress syndrome: a multicenter prospective observational study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2023;207(12):1591–601. 10.1164/rccm.202210-1882oc. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Baid H, Vempalli N, Kumar S, Arora P, Walia R, Chauhan U, Shukla K, Verma A, Chawang H, Agarwal D. Point of care ultrasound as initial diagnostic tool in acute dyspnea patients in the Emergency Department of a Tertiary Care Center: diagnostic accuracy study. Int J Emerg Med. 2022. 10.1186/s12245-022-00430-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Arthur M, Pichamuthu K, Turaka VP, Putta T, Jeeyavudeen MS, Zachariah A, Sathyendra S, Hansdak SG, Iyadurai R, Karuppusami R, Sudarsanam TD. Bedside Lung ultrasonography: comparison with chest radiography (blur), a diagnostic study in a developing country. Postgrad Med J. 2022;99(1173):724–30. 10.1136/pmj-2021-141343. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Pierrakos C, Smit MR, Pisani L, Paulus F, Schultz MJ, Constantin JM, Chiumello D, Mojoli F, Mongodi S, Bos LD. Lung ultrasound assessment of focal and non-focal lung morphology in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. Front Physiol. 2024. 10.3389/fphys.2021.730857. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.


Articles from Critical Care are provided here courtesy of BMC

RESOURCES