Chest radiographs for acute lower respiratory tract infections

Paediatric pulmonary disease-are we diagnosing it right?

Background

It has been reported that differential diagnosis of bacterial or viral pneumonia and tuberculosis (TB) in infants and young children is complex. This could be due to the difficulty in microbiological confirmation in this age group. In this study, we aimed to assess the utility of a real-time multiplex PCR for diagnosis of respiratory pathogens in children with pulmonary TB.

Methods

A total of 185 respiratory samples [bronchoalveolar lavage (15), gastric aspirates (98), induced sputum (21), and sputum (51)] from children aged 3-12 years, attending tertiary care hospitals, Chennai, India, were included in the study. The samples were processed by N acetyl L cysteine (NALC) NAOH treatment and subjected to microbiological investigations for Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) diagnosis that involved smear microscopy, Xpert® MTB/RIF testing, and liquid culture. In addition, DNA extraction from the processed sputum was carried out and was subjected to a multiplex real-time PCR comprising a panel of bacterial and fungal pathogens.

Results

Out of the 185 samples tested, a total of 20 samples were positive for MTB by either one or more identification methods (smear, culture, and GeneXpert). Out of these 20 MTB-positive samples, 15 were positive for one or more bacterial or fungal pathogens, with different cycle threshold values. Among patients with negative MTB test results (n = 165), 145 (87%) tested positive for one or more than one bacterial or fungal pathogens.

Conclusion

The results suggest that tuberculosis could coexist with other respiratory pathogens causing pneumonia. However, a large-scale prospective study from different geographical settings that uses such simultaneous detection methods for diagnosis of childhood tuberculosis and pneumonia will help in assessing the utility of these tests in rapid diagnosis of respiratory infections.

Lung Ultrasound and High-Resolution Computed Tomography in Suspected COVID-19 Patients Admitted to the Emergency Department: A Comparison

Objective

To analyze the diagnostic accuracy of lung ultrasonography (LUS) and high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT), to detect COVID-19.

Materials and Methods

This study recruited all patients admitted to the emergency medicine unit, due to a suspected COVID-19 infection, during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. These patients also who underwent a standardized LUS examination and a chest HRCT. The signs detected by both LUS and HRCT were reported, as well as the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for LUS and HRCT.

Results

This cohort included 159 patients, 101 (63%) were diagnosed with COVID-19. COVID-19 patients showed more often confluent subpleural consolidations and parenchymal consolidations in lower lung regions of LUS. They also had "ground glass" opacities and "crazy paving" on HRCT, while pleural effusion and pulmonary consolidations were more common in non-COVID-19 patients. LUS had a sensitivity of 0.97 (95% CI 0.92-0.99) and a specificity of 0.24 (95% CI 0.07-0.5) for COVID-19 lung infections. HRCT abnormalities resulted in a 0.98 sensitivity (95% CI 0.92-0.99) and 0.1 specificity (95% CI 0.04-0.23) for COVID-19 lung infections.

Conclusion

In this cohort, LUS proved to be a noninvasive, diagnostic tool with high sensitivity for lung abnormalities that were likewise detected by HRCT. Furthermore, LUS, despite its lower specificity, has a high sensitivity for COVID-19, which could prove to be as effective as HRCT in excluding a COVID-19 lung infection.

The Buddhasothorn Asthma Severity Score (BASS): A practical screening tool for predicting severe asthma exacerbations for pediatric patients

BACKGROUND AND AIM

A precise scaling system of acute asthma leads to an accurate assessment of disease severity. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of the Buddhasothorn Asthma Severity Score (BASS) with the Wood-Downes-Ferrés Scale (WDFS) to recognize the severity level of acute asthma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted comprising Thai children aged 2-15 years with acute asthma. The BASS and WFDS were rated once in the emergency department. The degree of severity was determined by frequency and type of nebulized bronchodilator administrations at the time of initial treatment. The optimum cutoff points for the area under the curve (AUC) were established to predict severe asthma exacerbations.

RESULTS

All 73 episodes of asthma exacerbations (EAEs) in 35 participants were analyzed. Fifty-nine (80.8%) EAEs were classified as severe. Both scales had good significance to recognize the selection of nebulized bronchodilator treatments by AUC of 0.815 (95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 0.680-0.950) in case of BASS, and AUC of 0.822 (95% CI: 0.70-0.944) in case of WDFS. Cutoff points of BASS ≥ 8 had sensitivity 72.9%, specificity 64.3%, positive predictive value (PPV) 89.6%, negative predictive value (NPV) 36.0% at an AUC of 0.718 (95% CI: 0.563-0.873) for severe exacerbations. These results were consistent for cutoff points of WDFS ≥ 5 with sensitivity 78.0%, specificity 50.0%, PPV 86.8%, NPV 35.0% at an AUC of 0.768 (95% CI: 0.650-0.886) for predicting severe exacerbations. There was no significant difference between the AUCs of both scales.

CONCLUSIONS

Both the BASS and WDFS were good and accurate scales and effective screening tools for predicting severe asthma exacerbations in pediatric patients by optimal cutoff points.

Community-acquired pneumonia - use of chest x-rays for diagnosis in family practice

Background

According to guidelines, the diagnosis of pneumonia should be confirmed by chest x-ray, ensuring appropriate management and wise use of antibiotics. Our study aimed to describe use of x-rays by family doctors and patients following diagnosis of pneumonia in primary care practices in the north of Israel.

Methods

This was a retrospective database study including adults diagnosed with pneumonia, assessing rates of referral and actual use of chest x-rays. We examined rates of referral for chest x-rays and rates of adherence to the referral, according to age, gender, smoking status, comorbidities and distance of residence from the radiology facility.

Results

During one year there were 4,230 diagnosed cases of pneumonia in the practice, of which 2,503 were referred for chest x-rays, and 1,920 adhered to the referral (45% of those diagnosed with pneumonia). The rate of referral was higher when the radiology facility was located in the same city as the family doctor compared to outside the city (69.7% and 53.2%, p < 0.001). Patients aged 40–64 were referred more than patients aged 18–39 or 65+ (61.5% vs. 56.5% and 58.3%, p = 0.03). Actual use of chest x-rays (considering both referral and adherence) was more likely when the radiology facility was in the same health centre or city than when it was outside the city [OR = 2.4; 95% CI: 2.1–2.8]; patients aged 65 + or 40–64 were more likely to adhere to the referral for x-ray than those aged 18–39 [OR = 1.3; 95% CI: 1.1–1.6, OR = 1.2; 95% CI: 1.0–1.4, respectively].

Conclusion

Accessibility of radiology facilities seems to be an important factor associated with both doctors’ decisions and patients’ adherence to the referral for chest x-rays.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-022-01872-y.

Initial findings in chest X-rays as predictors of worsening lung infection in patients with COVID-19: correlation in 265 patients

Background and aims

We aimed to analyze the relationship between the initial chest X-ray findings in patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome due to infection with SARS-CoV-2 and eventual clinical worsening and to compare three systems of quantifying these findings.

Material and methods

This retrospective study reviewed the clinical and radiological evolution of 265 adult patients with COVID-19 attended at our center between March 2020 and April 2020. We recorded data related to patients’ comorbidities, hospital stay, and clinical worsening (admission to the ICU, intubation, and death). We used three scoring systems taking into consideration 6 or 8 lung fields (designated 6A, 6B, and 8) to quantify lung involvement in each patient’s initial pathological chest X-ray and to classify its severity as mild, moderate, or severe, and we compared these three systems. We also recorded the presence of alveolar opacities and linear opacities (fundamentally linear atelectasis) in the first chest X-ray with pathologic findings.

Results

In the χ2 analysis, moderate or severe involvement in the three classification systems correlated with hospital admission (P = .009 in 6A, P = .001 in 6B, and P = .001 in 8) and with death (P = .02 in 6A, P = .01 in 6B, and P = .006 in 8). In the regression analysis, the most significant associations were 6B with alveolar involvement (OR 2.3; 95%CI 1.1.–4.7; P = .025;) and 8 with alveolar involvement (OR 2.07; 95% CI 1.01.–4.25; P = .046). No differences were observed in the ability of the three systems to predict clinical worsening by classifications of involvement in chest X-rays as moderate or severe.

Conclusion

Moderate/severe extension in the three chest X-ray scoring systems evaluating the extent of involvement over 6 or 8 lung fields and the finding of alveolar opacities in the first pathologic X-ray correlated with mortality and the rate of hospitalization in the patients studied. No significant difference was found in the predictive ability of the three classification systems proposed.

Discrepancies in the clinical and radiological profiles of COVID-19: A case-based discussion and review of literature

The current gold standard for the diagnosis of coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) is a positive reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test, on the background of clinical suspicion. However, RT-PCR has its limitations; this includes issues of low sensitivity, sampling errors and appropriate timing of specimen collection. As pulmonary involvement is the most common manifestation of severe COVID-19, early and appropriate lung imaging is important to aid diagnosis. However, gross discrepancies can occur between the clinical and imaging findings in patients with COVID-19, which can mislead clinicians in their decision making. Although chest X-ray (CXR) has a low sensitivity for the diagnosis of COVID-19 associated lung disease, especially in the earlier stages, a positive CXR increases the pre-test probability of COVID-19. CXR scoring systems have shown to be useful, such as the COVID-19 opacification rating score which helps to predict the need of tracheal intubation. Furthermore, artificial intelligence-based algorithms have also shown promise in differentiating COVID-19 pneumonia on CXR from other lung diseases. Although costlier than CXR, unenhanced computed tomographic (CT) chest scans have a higher sensitivity, but lesser specificity compared to RT-PCR for the diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia. A semi-quantitative CT scoring system has been shown to predict short-term mortality. The routine use of CT pulmonary angiography as a first-line imaging modality in patients with suspected COVID-19 is not justifiable due to the risk of contrast nephropathy. Scoring systems similar to those pioneered in CXR and CT can be used to effectively plan and manage hospital resources such as ventilators. Lung ultrasound is useful in the assessment of critically ill COVID-19 patients in the hands of an experienced operator. Moreover, it is a convenient tool to monitor disease progression, as it is cheap, non-invasive, easily accessible and easy to sterilise. Newer lung imaging modalities such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for safe imaging among children, adolescents and pregnant women are rapidly evolving. Imaging modalities are also essential for evaluating the extra-pulmonary manifestations of COVID-19: these include cranial imaging with CT or MRI; cardiac imaging with ultrasonography (US), CT and MRI; and abdominal imaging with US or CT. This review critically analyses the utility of each imaging modality to empower clinicians to use them appropriately in the management of patients with COVID-19 infection.

The influence of chest X-ray results on antibiotic prescription for childhood pneumonia in the emergency department

The aim of this study is to evaluate the influence of chest X-ray (CXR) results on antibiotic prescription in children suspected of lower respiratory tract infections (RTI) in the emergency department (ED). We performed a secondary analysis of a stepped-wedge, cluster randomized trial of children aged 1 month to 5 years with fever and cough/dyspnoea in 8 EDs in the Netherlands (2016-2018), including a 1-week follow-up. We analysed the observational data of the pre-intervention period, using multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the influence of CXR result on antibiotic prescription. We included 597 children (median age 17 months [IQR 9-30, 61% male). CXR was performed in 109/597 (18%) of children (range across hospitals 9 to 50%); 52/109 (48%) showed focal infiltrates. Children who underwent CXR were more likely to receive antibiotics, also when adjusted for clinical signs and symptoms, hospital and CXR result (OR 7.25 [95% CI 2.48-21.2]). Abnormalities on CXR were not significantly associated with antibiotic prescription.Conclusion: Performance of CXR was independently associated with more antibiotic prescription, regardless of its results. The limited influence of CXR results on antibiotic prescription highlights the inferior role of CXR on treatment decisions for suspected lower RTI in the ED. What is Known: • Chest X-ray (CXR) has a high inter-observer variability and cannot distinguish between bacterial or viral pneumonia. • Current guidelines recommend against routine use of CXR in children with uncomplicated respiratory tract infections (RTIs) in the outpatient setting. What is New: • CXR is still frequently performed in non-complex children suspected of lower RTIs in the emergency department • CXR performance was independently associated with more antibiotic prescriptions, regardless of its results, highlighting the inferior role of chest X-rays in treatment decisions.

Pipeline for Advanced Contrast Enhancement (PACE) of Chest X-ray in Evaluating COVID-19 Patients by Combining Bidimensional Empirical Mode Decomposition and Contrast Limited Adaptive Histogram Equalization (CLAHE)

COVID-19 is a new pulmonary disease which is driving stress to the hospitals due to the large number of cases worldwide. Imaging of lungs can play a key role in the monitoring of health status. Non-contrast chest computed tomography (CT) has been used for this purpose, mainly in China, with significant success. However, this approach cannot be massively used, mainly for both high risk and cost, also in some countries, this tool is not extensively available. Alternatively, chest X-ray, although less sensitive than CT-scan, can provide important information about the evolution of pulmonary involvement during the disease; this aspect is very important to verify the response of a patient to treatments. Here, we show how to improve the sensitivity of chest X-ray via a nonlinear post-processing tool, named PACE (Pipeline for Advanced Contrast Enhancement), combining properly Fast and Adaptive Bidimensional Empirical Mode Decomposition (FABEMD) and Contrast Limited Adaptive Histogram Equalization (CLAHE). The results show an enhancement of the image contrast as confirmed by three widely used metrics: (i) contrast improvement index, (ii) entropy, and (iii) measure of enhancement. This improvement gives rise to a detectability of more lung lesions as identified by two radiologists, who evaluated the images separately, and confirmed by CT-scans. The results show this method is a flexible and an effective approach for medical image enhancement and can be used as a post-processing tool for medical image understanding and analysis.

Diagnosis of common pulmonary diseases in children by X-ray images and deep learning

Acute lower respiratory infection is the leading cause of child death in developing countries. Current strategies to reduce this problem include early detection and appropriate treatment. Better diagnostic and therapeutic strategies are still needed in poor countries. Artificial-intelligence chest X-ray scheme has the potential to become a screening tool for lower respiratory infection in child. Artificial-intelligence chest X-ray schemes for children are rare and limited to a single lung disease. We need a powerful system as a diagnostic tool for most common lung diseases in children. To address this, we present a computer-aided diagnostic scheme for the chest X-ray images of several common pulmonary diseases of children, including bronchiolitis/bronchitis, bronchopneumonia/interstitial pneumonitis, lobar pneumonia, and pneumothorax. The study consists of two main approaches: first, we trained a model based on YOLOv3 architecture for cropping the appropriate location of the lung field automatically. Second, we compared three different methods for multi-classification, included the one-versus-one scheme, the one-versus-all scheme and training a classifier model based on convolutional neural network. Our model demonstrated a good distinguishing ability for these common lung problems in children. Among the three methods, the one-versus-one scheme has the best performance. We could detect whether a chest X-ray image is abnormal with 92.47% accuracy and bronchiolitis/bronchitis, bronchopneumonia, lobar pneumonia, pneumothorax, or normal with 71.94%, 72.19%, 85.42%, 85.71%, and 80.00% accuracy, respectively. In conclusion, we provide a computer-aided diagnostic scheme by deep learning for common pulmonary diseases in children. This scheme is mostly useful as a screening for normal versus most of lower respiratory problems in children. It can also help review the chest X-ray images interpreted by clinicians and may remind possible negligence. This system can be a good diagnostic assistance under limited medical resources.

[Guidelines for the Management of Community Acquired Pneumonia in Children and Adolescents (Pediatric Community Acquired Pneumonia, pCAP) - Issued under the Responsibility of the German Society for Pediatric Infectious Diseases (DGPI) and the German Society for Pediatric Pulmonology (GPP)]

The present guideline aims to improve the evidence-based management of children and adolescents with pediatric community-acquired pneumonia (pCAP). Despite a prevalence of approx. 300 cases per 100 000 children per year in Central Europe, mortality is very low. Prevention includes infection control measures and comprehensive immunization. The diagnosis can and should be established clinically by history, physical examination and pulse oximetry, with fever and tachypnea as cardinal features. Additional signs or symptoms such as severely compromised general condition, poor feeding, dehydration, altered consciousness or seizures discriminate subjects with severe pCAP from those with non-severe pCAP. Within an age-dependent spectrum of infectious agents, bacterial etiology cannot be reliably differentiated from viral or mixed infections by currently available biomarkers. Most children and adolescents with non-severe pCAP and oxygen saturation > 92 % can be managed as outpatients without laboratory/microbiology workup or imaging. Anti-infective agents are not generally indicated and can be safely withheld especially in children of young age, with wheeze or other indices suggesting a viral origin. For calculated antibiotic therapy, aminopenicillins are the preferred drug class with comparable efficacy of oral (amoxicillin) and intravenous administration (ampicillin). Follow-up evaluation after 48 - 72 hours is mandatory for the assessment of clinical course, treatment success and potential complications such as parapneumonic pleural effusion or empyema, which may necessitate alternative or add-on therapy.

Chest CT findings of early and progressive phase COVID-19 infection from a US patient

The SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19), originally reported in Wuhan, China, has rapidly proliferated throughout several continents and the first case in the United States was reported on January 19, 2020. According to the ACR guidelines issued shortly after this disease was declared a pandemic, radiologists are expected to familiarize themselves with the CT appearance of COVID-19 infection in order to be able to identify specific findings of this entity. This case report discusses the relevant imaging findings of one of the first cases in the mid-western United States. It involves a 60-year-old man who presented with fever, dyspnea, and cough for 1 week and subsequently tested positive for COVID-19. The utility of the noncontrast CT chest in the diagnosis of COVID-19 has been controversial, but there are specific imaging findings that have been increasingly associated with this virus in the appropriate clinical context. The stages of imaging findings in COVID-19 are considered along with the implications of fibrosis throughout the stages. Future considerations include using artificial intelligence algorithms to distinguish between community acquired pneumonias and COVID-19 infection.

Clinical and Chest Radiography Features Determine Patient Outcomes in Young and Middle-aged Adults with COVID-19

Background Chest radiography has not been validated for its prognostic utility in evaluating patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Purpose To analyze the prognostic value of a chest radiograph severity scoring system for younger (nonelderly) patients with COVID-19 at initial presentation to the emergency department (ED); outcomes of interest included hospitalization, intubation, prolonged stay, sepsis, and death. Materials and Methods In this retrospective study, patients between the ages of 21 and 50 years who presented to the ED of an urban multicenter health system from March 10 to March 26, 2020, with COVID-19 confirmation on real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction were identified. Each patient's ED chest radiograph was divided into six zones and examined for opacities by two cardiothoracic radiologists, and scores were collated into a total concordant lung zone severity score. Clinical and laboratory variables were collected. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the relationship between clinical parameters, chest radiograph scores, and patient outcomes. Results The study included 338 patients: 210 men (62%), with median age of 39 years (interquartile range, 31-45 years). After adjustment for demographics and comorbidities, independent predictors of hospital admission (n = 145, 43%) were chest radiograph severity score of 2 or more (odds ratio, 6.2; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.5, 11; P < .001) and obesity (odds ratio, 2.4 [95% CI: 1.1, 5.4] or morbid obesity). Among patients who were admitted, a chest radiograph score of 3 or more was an independent predictor of intubation (n = 28) (odds ratio, 4.7; 95% CI: 1.8, 13; P = .002) as was hospital site. No significant difference was found in primary outcomes across race and ethnicity or those with a history of tobacco use, asthma, or diabetes mellitus type II. Conclusion For patients aged 21-50 years with coronavirus disease 2019 presenting to the emergency department, a chest radiograph severity score was predictive of risk for hospital admission and intubation. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

In with acute bronchitis; out with duodenal perforation: the potentially harmful cascade of over-testing. A case report

Overutilization of diagnostic imaging can lead to unnecessary interventions and subsequently can jeopardize patient safety. When ordered, the results of these images should always be interpreted in the appropriate clinical context taking into consideration the patient clinical presentation and the natural history of the diseases which are being investigated. We presented a case that demonstrates for the practicing physicians how violating these two notions can lead ultimately to patient harm.

A decision support model to predict the presence of an acute infiltrate on chest radiograph

A chest infiltrate is needed to make a diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia, but chest X-rays might be time consuming, entail radiation exposure, and demand resources that are not always available. We sought to derive a model to predict whether a patient will have an infiltrate on chest X-ray (CXR). This prospective observational study included patients visiting the Emergency Department of Beilinson Hospital in the years 2003-2004 (derivation cohort) and 2010-2011 (validation cohort), who had undergone a CXR, and were suspected of having a respiratory infection. We excluded all patients with possible healthcare associated infections. A logistic regression model was derived and applied to the validation cohort. A total of 1,555 patients met inclusion criteria: 993 in the derivation cohort and 562 in the validation cohort with 287 (29%) and 226 (40%) having an infiltrate, respectively. The derivation model area-under-the curve (AUC) was 0.79 (95% CI 0.76-0.82). We categorized the patients into three groups-presence or absence of infiltrate, or undetermined. In the validation cohort, 70 (12%) patients were classified as 'no infiltrate'; 3 (4%) of them had an infiltrate, 367 (65%) were classified as 'infiltrate'; 190 (52%) of them had an infiltrate on CXR, and 125 (46%) were classified as 'undetermined'; 33 (26%) of them with an infiltrate on CXR. Using this prediction model for the evaluation of patients with suspected respiratory infection in an ED setting may help avoid over 10% of CXRs.

Lung magnetic resonance imaging for pneumonia in children

Technical factors have historically limited the role of MRI in the evaluation of pneumonia in children in routine clinical practice. As imaging technology has advanced, recent studies utilizing practical MR imaging protocols have shown MRI to be an accurate potential alternative to CT for the evaluation of pneumonia and its complications. This article provides up-to-date MR imaging techniques that can be implemented in most radiology departments to evaluate pneumonia in children. Imaging findings in pneumonia on MRI are also reviewed. In addition, the current literature describing the diagnostic performance of MRI for pneumonia is discussed. Furthermore, potential risks and limitations of MRI for the evaluation of pneumonia in children are described.

Lung ultrasound as a diagnostic tool for radiographically-confirmed pneumonia in low resource settings

Background

Pneumonia is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in children worldwide; however, its diagnosis can be challenging, especially in settings where skilled clinicians or standard imaging are unavailable. We sought to determine the diagnostic accuracy of lung ultrasound when compared to radiographically-confirmed clinical pediatric pneumonia.

Methods

Between January 2012 and September 2013, we consecutively enrolled children aged 2–59 months with primary respiratory complaints at the outpatient clinics, emergency department, and inpatient wards of the Instituto Nacional de Salud del Niño in Lima, Peru. All participants underwent clinical evaluation by a pediatrician and lung ultrasonography by one of three general practitioners. We also consecutively enrolled children without respiratory symptoms. Children with respiratory symptoms had a chest radiograph. We obtained ancillary laboratory testing in a subset.

Results

Final clinical diagnoses included 453 children with pneumonia, 133 with asthma, 103 with bronchiolitis, and 143 with upper respiratory infections. In total, CXR confirmed the diagnosis in 191 (42%) of 453 children with clinical pneumonia. A consolidation on lung ultrasound, which is our primary endpoint for pneumonia, had a sensitivity of 88.5%, specificity of 100%, and an area under-the-curve of 0.94 (95% CI 0.92–0.97) when compared to radiographically-confirmed clinical pneumonia. When any abnormality on lung ultrasound was compared to radiographically-confirmed clinical pneumonia the sensitivity increased to 92.2% and the specificity decreased to 95.2%, with an area under-the-curve of 0.94 (95% CI 0.91–0.96).

Conclusions

Lung ultrasound had high diagnostic accuracy for the diagnosis of radiographically-confirmed pneumonia. Added benefits of lung ultrasound include rapid testing and high inter-rater agreement. Lung ultrasound may serve as an alternative tool for the diagnosis of pediatric pneumonia.

•

Lung ultrasound is emerging as a promising imaging alternative for the diagnosis of pneumonia in children.

•

Existing studies in children are limited by small sample size, heterogeneity of populations, variable reference standards, and selection bias.

•

We found that lung ultrasound can be implemented at a busy healthcare center with high diagnostic accuracy and high inter-rater agreement.

•

Lung ultrasound was conducted without major disruptions in workflow, and it took <10 minutes to perform in most instances.

•

This is the largest study demonstrating high diagnostic accuracy of lung ultrasound in children for the diagnosis of pneumonia.

Preliminary report from the World Health Organisation Chest Radiography in Epidemiological Studies project

Childhood pneumonia is among the leading infectious causes of mortality in children younger than 5 years of age globally. Streptococcus pneumoniae (pneumococcus) is the leading infectious cause of childhood bacterial pneumonia. The diagnosis of childhood pneumonia remains a critical epidemiological task for monitoring vaccine and treatment program effectiveness. The chest radiograph remains the most readily available and common imaging modality to assess childhood pneumonia. In 1997, the World Health Organization Radiology Working Group was established to provide a consensus method for the standardized definition for the interpretation of pediatric frontal chest radiographs, for use in bacterial vaccine efficacy trials in children. The definition was not designed for use in individual patient clinical management because of its emphasis on specificity at the expense of sensitivity. These definitions and endpoint conclusions were published in 2001 and an analysis of observer variation for these conclusions using a reference library of chest radiographs was published in 2005. In response to the technical needs identified through subsequent meetings, the World Health Organization Chest Radiography in Epidemiological Studies (CRES) project was initiated and is designed to be a continuation of the World Health Organization Radiology Working Group. The aims of the World Health Organization CRES project are to clarify the definitions used in the World Health Organization defined standardized interpretation of pediatric chest radiographs in bacterial vaccine impact and pneumonia epidemiological studies, reinforce the focus on reproducible chest radiograph readings, provide training and support with World Health Organization defined standardized interpretation of chest radiographs and develop guidelines and tools for investigators and site staff to assist in obtaining high-quality chest radiographs.

Suspected community-acquired pneumonia in an ambulatory setting (CAPA): a French prospective observational cohort study in general practice

Background:

Few studies have addressed the pragmatic management of ambulatory patients with suspected community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) using a precise description of the disease with or without chest X-ray (X-ray) evidence.

Aims:

To describe the characteristics, clinical findings, additional investigations and disease progression in patients with suspected CAP managed by French General Practitioners (GPs).

Methods:

The patients included were older than 18 years, with signs or symptoms suggestive of CAP associated with recent-onset unilateral crackles on auscultation or a new opacity on X-ray. They were followed for up to 6 weeks. Descriptive analyses of all patients and according to their management with X-rays were carried out.

Results:

From September 2011 to July 2012, 886 patients have been consulted by 267 GPs. Among them, 278 (31%) were older than 65 years and 337 (38%) were at increased risk for invasive pneumococcal disease. At presentation, the three most common symptoms, cough (94%), fever (93%), and weakness or myalgia (81%), were all observed in 70% of patients. Unilateral crackles were observed in 77% of patients. Among patients with positive radiography (64%), 36% had no unilateral crackles. A null CRB-65 score was obtained in 62% of patients. Most patients (94%) initially received antibiotics and experienced uncomplicated disease progression regardless of their management with X-rays. Finally, 7% of patients were hospitalised and 0.3% died.

Conclusions:

Most patients consulting GPs for suspected CAP had the three following most common symptoms: cough, fever, and weakness or myalgia. More than a third of them were at increased risk for invasive pneumococcal disease. With or without X-rays, most patients received antibiotics and experienced uncomplicated disease progression.

The radiological diagnosis of pneumonia in children

Despite the importance of paediatric pneumonia as a cause of short and long-term morbidity and mortality worldwide, a reliable gold standard for its diagnosis remains elusive. The utility of clinical, microbiological and radiological diagnostic approaches varies widely within and between populations and is heavily dependent on the expertise and resources available in various settings. Here we review the role of radiology in the diagnosis of paediatric pneumonia. Chest radiographs (CXRs) are the most widely employed test, however, they are not indicated in ambulatory settings, cannot distinguish between viral and bacterial infections and have a limited role in the ongoing management of disease. A standardised definition of alveolar pneumonia on a CXR exists for epidemiological studies targeting bacterial pneumonias but it should not be extrapolated to clinical settings. Radiography, computed tomography and to a lesser extent ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging play an important role in complicated pneumonias but there are limitations that preclude their use as routine diagnostic tools. Large population-based studies are needed in different populations to address many of the knowledge gaps in the radiological diagnosis of pneumonia in children, however, the feasibility of such studies is an important barrier.

The diagnosis of pneumonia requires a chest radiograph (x-ray)-yes, no or sometimes?

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) remains a common condition associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. Outcome is improved by early recognition and rapid institution of empirical antibiotic therapy. A number of international guidelines recommend a chest radiograph (x-ray) is obtained when pneumonia is suspected; the argument forwarded is that chest radiographs are relatively inexpensive and enable pneumonia (lung consolidation) to be confirmed or excluded. But, radiographs are not available in the community setting and introduce a delay in diagnosis and treatment. For these reasons, in mild CAP treated by primary care, guidelines suggest criteria for clinical diagnosis. However, there is debate as to whether clinical features alone are sufficiently reliable to support a diagnosis of CAP with some suggesting diagnostic precision is improved by chest radiographs. Conversely, several studies have demonstrated a lack of agreement in the interpretation of chest radiographs bringing their role as the ultimate arbiter of diagnosis into question. Below we debate the diagnostic role of the humble chest radiograph in the context of suspected CAP.