Table 3.
Diagnostic accuracy of individual LUS features on comparison with composite standard.
| LUS findings | LUS vs. composite standard | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sensitivity | Specificity | PPV | NPV | |
| Lung sliding | 100% (95% CI: 59.04%–100%) | 97.75% (95% CI: 92.12%–99.73%) | 77.78% (95% CI: 47.07%–93.23%) | 100% (95% CI: 95.85%–100%) |
| B-lines | 100% (95% CI: 59.04%–100%) | 97.75% (95% CI: 92.12%–99.73%) | 77.78% (95% CI: 47.07%–93.23%) | 100% (95% CI: 95.85%–100%) |
| Lung pulse | 100% (95% CI: 59.04%–100%) | 97.75% (95% CI: 92.12%–99.73%) | 77.78% (95% CI: 47.07%–93.23%) | 100% (95% CI: 95.85%–100%) |
| Lung point | 42.86% (95% CI: 9.90%–81.59%) | 100% (95% CI: 15.81%–100%) | 100% (95% CI: 29.24%–100%) | 33.33% (95% CI: 20.84%–48.71%) |
LUS, lung ultrasound; CI, confidence interval; PPV, positive predictive value; NPV, negative predictive value.