Why the study?
Variable image acquisition methods, inconsistent technique reporting, and variable B-line quantification in lung ultrasound for heart failure have made comparing published reports difficult.
This expert consensus document provides a standardized reporting checklist to enhance the quality and transparency of lung ultrasound research in heart failure.
Standardized lung ultrasound protocols should now guide heart failure assessment; extends prior work by enabling consistent B-line quantification across studies.
Lung ultrasound is a useful tool for the assessment of patients with both acute and chronic heart failure, but the use of different image acquisition methods, inconsistent reporting of the technique employed and variable quantification of 'B-lines,' have all made it difficult to compare published reports. We therefore need to ensure that future studies utilizing lung ultrasound in the assessment of heart failure adopt a standardized approach to reporting the quantification of pulmonary congestion. Strategies to improve patient care by use of lung ultrasound in the assessment of heart failure have been difficult to develop. In the present document, key aspects of standardization are discussed, including equipment used, number of chest zones assessed, the method of quantifying B-lines, the presence and timing of additional investigations (e.g. natriuretic peptides and echocardiography) and the impact of therapy. This consensus report includes a checklist to provide standardization in the preparation, review and analysis of manuscripts. This will serve as a guide for investigators and clinicians and enhance the quality and transparency of lung ultrasound research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Platz et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: