Clinical research on point-of-care lung ultrasound: misconceptions and limitations

Abstract

Over the last 20 years, advances in point-of-care lung ultrasound (PoCLUS) have been consistent. The clinical application of PoCLUS has drastically changed the diagnosis of some respiratory conditions mainly in the acute setting. Despite these improvements, misconceptions regarding the current scientific evidence and errors in the direction given to the latest research are delaying the implementation of PoCLUS in the clinical field. The diagnostic power of PoCLUS is still under-evaluated in many settings and there is a generalized yet unjustified feeling that further evidence is needed before introducing PoCLUS as a standard of care. In the effort to build up further evidence by new studies, the role of randomized clinical trials is over-emphasized and gold standards used to investigate diagnostic accuracy of PoCLUS are sometimes not appropriate. Moreover, the sonographic patterns and techniques used to confirm the diagnoses not always are adapted to the patients’ clinical condition, which limit the scientific value of those clinical studies. Finally, there is a recurrent confusion in the role of PoCLUS scoring techniques, which should be only applied to quantify and monitor injury severity and not to diagnose lung diseases. Awareness of these misconceptions and errors could help the researchers when approaching new study projects on PoCLUS.