Background: Pediatric pneumonia remains a major cause of childhood morbidity and mortality. Although chest radiography (CXR) is commonly used for imaging, lung ultrasound (LUS) provides a radiation-free bedside alternative. Its potential role in differentiating bacterial from viral pneumonia requires further evaluation. Aims and Objectives: This study aimed to determine the diagnostic performance of LUS and its potential role in identifying the etiology of pediatric pneumonia. Materials and Methods: A hospital-based cross-sectional study was conducted over 1 year at Assam Medical College and Hospital, enrolling 150 children aged 1 month–12 years with clinically diagnosed pneumonia. LUS was performed using a high-frequency linear transducer, assessing consolidations, pleural effusion, and B-lines. Nasopharyngeal swabs Indian Council of Medical Research reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and clinical data stratified cases into bacterial (n=62) and viral (n=88) groups. Sensitivity and specificity of LUS were compared with CXR using Chi square and t-tests (P < 0.05). Results: Using CXR as the reference standard, LUS demonstrated a sensitivity of 96.16% (95% CI: 93.15–100%) and specificity of 94.90% (95% CI: 88.49–98.32%) for pneumonia. Consolidations >10 mm (43.55% vs. 0%; P < 0.0001) and pleural effusion (33.87% vs. 5.68%; P < 0.0001) were more frequent in bacterial pneumonia, whereas B-lines were more common in viral pneumonia (54.55% vs. 19.35%; P < 0.0001). Fever and crackles were significantly more frequent in the bacterial group. Conclusion: LUS demonstrated high diagnostic performance for pediatric pneumonia. Distinct sonographic patterns differed significantly between bacterial and viral groups, suggesting that LUS may serve as a useful bedside adjunct for diagnosis and etiological assessment when interpreted alongside clinical and microbiological findings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shira et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: