Arjen M Dondorp1,2,3, Marcus J Schultz1,2,3. 1. Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom. 2. University Medical Centers Amsterdam, Location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 3. Mahidol-Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit (MORU), Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic is rapidly expanding across the world,
with more than 60,000 new cases each day as of late March 2020. Healthcare workers are
struggling to provide the best care for patients with proven or suspected COVID-19.
Approaches for clinical care vary widely between countries and regions, and new insights
are acquired rapidly. This includes the use of available imaging techniques.In this issue of the American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene,
Chaisith and others[1] report a case of
COVID-19 from Bangkok, Thailand, recovering with only supportive care.[1] The case not only highlights the importance
of early quarantining and repeated virologic testing of suspected COVID-19patients but
also demonstrates well that abnormalities on the chest X-ray can precede a positive severe
acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction
result from nasopharyngeal or throat swabs. Furthermore, Dr. Chaisith and others[1] compared lung images from chest X-ray, chest
computed tomography (CT) scan, and lung ultrasound (LUS) obtained later in the course of
the disease.In COVID-19, chest X-ray typically shows nonspecific multi-lobar infiltrates or pulmonary
infiltration that can rapidly progress over 1–2 days. Chest CT scan findings in
COVID-19 are more specific, including bilateral, multi-lobar, ground-glass opacification,
which can become very extensive with disease progression, and multifocal consolidative
opacities with surrounding spared tissue.[2]Although these typical chest CT scan findings are highly informative, they are of limited
value in resource-limited settings, where access to CT scanners is in general very limited.
In addition, obtaining a chest CT scan is highly impractical once a patient is admitted to
the intensive care unit for invasive ventilation because this requires dangerous and
labor-intensive transportation to the CT scanner. Last but not least, there is a risk of
contamination of the CT scanner and, thus, spread of the infection to other patients within
the hospital.The potential benefit of point-of-care LUS as a diagnostic tool in COVID-19 should be
highlighted. Lung ultrasound is a well-established, noninvasive, rapid, repeatable,
sensitive, bedside method to detect pulmonary pathology, including pneumothorax, pleural
effusion, and pulmonary infiltrates or consolidations. Lung ultrasound has even been
advocated as an alternative for chest X-ray and chest CT scan for diagnosing acute
respiratory distress syndrome.[3-5] Lung ultrasound is easy to perform and has
almost no costs after the initial purchase of the ultrasound machine (around
10,000–15,000 USD). For poor patients in low- or middle-income countries, even a
chest X-ray can be a considerable out-of-pocket expenditure if these costs are not covered
by insurance or government funds. Also, chest X-rays in low-resource settings are often of
poor quality, with a much lower sensitivity than LUS to detect pleural or parenchymal
abnormalities.[6]This information supports more extensive deployment of point-of-care LUS in COVID-19patients, in particular in settings where resources are limited. The COVID-19 case
presented by Chaisith describes LUS abnormalities observed at the 12th day of hospital
admission. They did not show whether earlier COVID-19–related lung pathology is
detectable by LUS, but this is probably the case. Whether LUS findings show
COVID-19–specific features will need further exploration because this could provide
a valuable diagnostic tool to distinguish COVID-19 from other pulmonary infections, and
suggests the possibility of a severity score based on LUS findings. For example, the usual
absence of pleural fluid in COVID-19 could be of diagnostic value because pleural fluid can
be easily detected by LUS and is often present in patients with bacterial pneumonia and
other conditions that result in respiratory distress, such as pulmonary congestion with
heart failure.Lung ultrasound could confirm on a larger scale whether the abnormalities observed on chest
CT scan of multifocal opacities alternating with normal aerated lung represent a common
lung pathology in COVID-19. This could have important practical consequences for
ventilation strategies in individual patients. Focal areas of dense atelectasis, which are
difficult or not to reopen, surrounded by remarkably compliant normal lung tissue, would
imply that in patients needing invasive ventilation, high positive end-expiratory pressures
(PEEP) may not be beneficial, and could even be harmful. Indeed, too high PEEP could cause
overdistension and damage of ventilated unaffected lung areas, whereas the infected areas
with atelectasis remain unventilated. This could lead to an increase in intrapulmonary
shunt, worsening the already grave hypoxemia in severe COVID-19 disease. To further prove
this concept, LUS could be used as a real-time imaging tool to evaluate the success or
failure of attempts to reopen atelectatic lung tissue, for example, with high PEEP. Early
experience from Amsterdam, the Netherlands, suggests that an emphasis on prone positioning
and use of much lower PEEP in COVID-19patients than in others with respiratory failure
results in good patient outcomes (Schultz, personal communication).In summary, LUS is a promising additional imaging tool in patients with COVID-19, in
particular in resource-limited settings in low- and middle-income countries.
Authors: Giovanni Volpicelli; Mahmoud Elbarbary; Michael Blaivas; Daniel A Lichtenstein; Gebhard Mathis; Andrew W Kirkpatrick; Lawrence Melniker; Luna Gargani; Vicki E Noble; Gabriele Via; Anthony Dean; James W Tsung; Gino Soldati; Roberto Copetti; Belaid Bouhemad; Angelika Reissig; Eustachio Agricola; Jean-Jacques Rouby; Charlotte Arbelot; Andrew Liteplo; Ashot Sargsyan; Fernando Silva; Richard Hoppmann; Raoul Breitkreutz; Armin Seibel; Luca Neri; Enrico Storti; Tomislav Petrovic Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2012-03-06 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Veronica Vercesi; Luigi Pisani; Patricia S I van Tongeren; Wim K Lagrand; Stije J Leopold; Mischa M A Huson; Patricia C Henwood; Andrew Walden; Marry Smit; Elisabeth D Riviello; Paolo Pelosi; Arjen M Dondorp; Marcus J Schultz Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2018-01-24 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Elisabeth D Riviello; Willy Kiviri; Theogene Twagirumugabe; Ariel Mueller; Valerie M Banner-Goodspeed; Laurent Officer; Victor Novack; Marguerite Mutumwinka; Daniel S Talmor; Robert A Fowler Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2016-01-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Stije J Leopold; Aniruddha Ghose; Katherine A Plewes; Subash Mazumder; Luigi Pisani; Hugh W F Kingston; Sujat Paul; Anupam Barua; M Abdus Sattar; Michaëla A M Huson; Andrew P Walden; Patricia C Henwood; Elisabeth D Riviello; Marcus J Schultz; Nicholas P J Day; Asok Kumar Dutta; Nicholas J White; Arjen M Dondorp Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-12-12 Impact factor: 3.240