摘要目的 探讨床旁实时超声诊断技术对慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)和心源性肺水肿的临床诊断价值.方法 采用前瞻性单盲临床研究方法,纳入2012年9月至2013年9月安徽医科大学附属省立医院重症医学科收治的89例呼吸衰竭患者,其中临床诊断为COPD 32例,心源性肺水肿31例,间质性肺病8例,肺部感染12例,其他6例.另选择30例非肺部疾病患者作为对照组.所有患者于入院后24 h内进行床旁超声扫描,观察是否存在胸膜线平行线(“A”线)和彗星尾征(“B”线),同时完成胸部X线检查.超声检查“A”线阳性被定义为COPD,“B”线阳性被定义为心源性肺水肿.结果 89例患者中,超声检查“A”线阳性33例、平均(2.94±1.87)条/例,超声检查“B”线阳性38例、平均(3.27±1.72)条/例;对照组“A”线(1.94±0.96)条/例,“B”线(1.74±0.82)条/例;两组比较差异有统计学意义(“A”线:t=3.835,P=0.000;“B”线:t=6.540,P=0.000).32例临床诊断COPD患者中有26例“A”线阳性,符合率为81.2％;31例临床诊断为心源性肺水肿患者中有25例“B”线阳性,符合率为80.6％.超声“A”线阳性诊断COPD的敏感度为81.30％,特异度为87.70％,阳性预测值为78.80％,阴性预测值为89.30％;超声“B”线阳性诊断心源性肺水肿的敏感度为80.60％,特异度为77.60％,阳性预测值为65.80％,阴性预测值为88.20％.而X线胸片诊断COPD的敏感度为65.50％,特异度为86.00％,阳性预测值为72.40％,阴性预测值为81.70％;X线胸片诊断心源性肺水肿的敏感度为74.20％,特异度为69.00％,阳性预测值为56.10％,阴性预测值为83.30％.在诊断COPD方面,超声“A”线和X线影像学技术均可用于诊断,且诊断价值相当[受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC):0.833比0.816,P＞0.05],但“A”线Kappa值大于X线影像学诊断技术(0.685比0.527).在诊断心源性肺水肿方面,超声“A”线的诊断价值不大,AUC为0.305;而“B”线可用于诊断,诊断价值优于X线影像学技术(AUC:0.888比0.747,P＜0.001),且Kappa值大于X线影像学诊断技术(0.553比0.481).结论 床旁超声技术可用于COPD和心源性肺水肿等相关呼吸系统疾病的临床辅助诊断,且具有实时动态、便于反复检查的特点.

abstractsObjective To study the diagnostic accuracy of bedside lung ultrasound examination in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and cardiac pulmonary edema.Methods A prospective pilot and single-blind trial was conducted.A total of 89 patients with respiratory failure admitted to the Department of Critical Care Medicine of Anhui Provincial Hospital from September 2012 to September 2013 were enrolled.There were 32 patients with COPD,31 patients with cardiac pulmonary edema,8 patients with interstitial lung disease,12 with lung infection,and 6 patients with other diseases.Another group of 30 patients without respiratory disease were enrolled as the control group.Bedside lung ultrasound examinations were performed in all patients within 24 hours,and chest radiograph was performed at the same time.The signs to be revealed were the "A" lines or horizontal lines arising from the pleural line,and the comet-tail artifact ("B" lines) arising from the lung wall interface.Results Of 89 patients,33 patients were shown a mean of 2.94 ± 1.87 "A" lines per case with the bedside lung ultrasound,and 38 patients with a mean of 3.27 ± 1.72 "B" lines per patient.1.94 ± 0.96 "A" lines a case and 1.74 ± 0.82 "B" lines a case in control group.There were significant difference between the test group and control group ("A"line:t=3.835,P=0.000; "B" line:t=6.540,P=0.000).Among 32 cases with COPD,28 patients had a positive result of "A" line with a coincidence rate of 81.2％.In the 31 patients with cardiac pulmonary edema,25 patients presented "B" line,with a coincidence rate of 80.6％.The "A" lines or horizontal lines arising from the pleural line showed a sensitivity of 81.30％ and a specificity of 87.70％ with a positive predictive value (PPV) 78.80％ and a negative predictive value (NPV) 89.30％ of in the diagnosis of COPD,and the "B" lines showed a sensitivity of 80.60％ and a specificity of 77.60％ with a PPV of 65.80％ and a NPV of 88.20％ in the diagnosis of cardiac pulmonary edema.However,X-ray examination showed a sensitivity of 65.50％,a specificity of 86.00％,a PPV of 72.40％ and a NPV of 81.70％ in the diagnosis of COPD,and it showed a sensitivity of 74.20％,a specificity of 69.00％,a PPV of 56.10％ and a NPV of 83.30％ in the diagnosis of cardiac pulmonary edema.Bedside ultrasound was highly consistent with X-ray in diagnosis of COPD [area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC):0.833 vs.0.816,P＞0.05],but Kappa value of ultrasound technology "A" line in the diagnosis of COPD was greater than the value of X-ray imaging techniques (0.685 vs.0.527).There was little diagnostic value of ultrasound "A" line in cardiac pulmonary edema (AUC was 0.305),while the "B" line was superior to X-ray (AUC:0.888 vs.0.747,P＜0.001),and had a higher Kappa value than the value of X-ray imaging techniques (0.553 vs.0.481) in cardiac pulmonary edema.Conclusions We conclude that bedside ultrasound is cost-effective,easy for repeated examination,and suitable for differential diagnosis of lung diseases.It might be useful in screening for COPD and cardiac pulmonary edema.