“…The main ultrasound findings seen in SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia are well defined: The interstitial involvement (various patterns of B lines), consolidation and irregularities of the pleural line [ 7 , 15 ]. While none of these pathologic abnormalities are specific, in the adequate clinical scenario, the bilateral and patchy distribution (areas of sparing) may aid in the diagnosis [ 8 , 15 , 16 ].…”
There is growing evidence regarding the imaging findings of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in lung ultrasounds, however, their role in predicting the prognosis has yet to be explored. Our objective was to assess the usefulness of lung ultrasound in the short-term follow-up (1 and 3 months) of patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, and to describe the progression of the most relevant lung ultrasound findings. We conducted a prospective, longitudinal and observational study performed in patients with confirmed COVID-19 who underwent a lung ultrasound examination during hospitalization and repeated it 1 and 3 months after hospital discharge. A total of 96 patients were enrolled. In the initial ultrasound, bilateral involvement was present in 100% of the patients with mild, moderate or severe ARDS. The most affected lung area was the posteroinferior (93.8%) followed by the lateral (88.7%). Subpleural consolidations were present in 68% of the patients and consolidations larger than 1 cm in 24%. One month after the initial study, only 20.8% had complete resolution on lung ultrasound. This percentage rose to 68.7% at 3 months. Residual lesions were observed in a significant percentage of patients who recovered from moderate or severe ARDS (32.4% and 61.5%, respectively). In conclusion, lung injury associated with COVID-19 might take time to resolve. The findings in this report support the use of lung ultrasound in the short-term follow-up of patients recovered from COVID-19, as a radiation-sparing, easy to use, novel care path worth exploring.
“…The main ultrasound findings seen in SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia are well defined: The interstitial involvement (various patterns of B lines), consolidation and irregularities of the pleural line [ 7 , 15 ]. While none of these pathologic abnormalities are specific, in the adequate clinical scenario, the bilateral and patchy distribution (areas of sparing) may aid in the diagnosis [ 8 , 15 , 16 ].…”
There is growing evidence regarding the imaging findings of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in lung ultrasounds, however, their role in predicting the prognosis has yet to be explored. Our objective was to assess the usefulness of lung ultrasound in the short-term follow-up (1 and 3 months) of patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, and to describe the progression of the most relevant lung ultrasound findings. We conducted a prospective, longitudinal and observational study performed in patients with confirmed COVID-19 who underwent a lung ultrasound examination during hospitalization and repeated it 1 and 3 months after hospital discharge. A total of 96 patients were enrolled. In the initial ultrasound, bilateral involvement was present in 100% of the patients with mild, moderate or severe ARDS. The most affected lung area was the posteroinferior (93.8%) followed by the lateral (88.7%). Subpleural consolidations were present in 68% of the patients and consolidations larger than 1 cm in 24%. One month after the initial study, only 20.8% had complete resolution on lung ultrasound. This percentage rose to 68.7% at 3 months. Residual lesions were observed in a significant percentage of patients who recovered from moderate or severe ARDS (32.4% and 61.5%, respectively). In conclusion, lung injury associated with COVID-19 might take time to resolve. The findings in this report support the use of lung ultrasound in the short-term follow-up of patients recovered from COVID-19, as a radiation-sparing, easy to use, novel care path worth exploring.
“… Pleural effusion:. Although small entity of fluid are frequently detected, a significant pleural effusion is not commonly present and should raise concern of a comorbid disease [9] . Figure 1 Lung ultrasound patterns in patients with Covid-19 pneumonia.…”
“…The evaluation of differential diagnosis for dyspnoea includes also assessment of echocardiography [ 120 ]. Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) is an easy diagnostic tool for early assessment of the cardiac function, but the choice of the echocardiography type (transthoracic-TTE- vs. transoesophageal-TEE) is closely related to the clinical conditions of each patient.…”
Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been a pandemic challenge for the last year. Cardiovascular disease is the most described comorbidity in COVID-19 patients, and it is related to the disease severity and progression. COVID-19 induces direct damage on cardiovascular system, leading to arrhythmias and myocarditis, and indirect damage due to endothelial dysfunction and systemic inflammation with a high inflammatory burden. Indirect damage leads to myocarditis, coagulation abnormalities and venous thromboembolism, Takotsubo cardiomyopathy, Kawasaki-like disease and multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children. Imaging can support the management, assessment and prognostic evaluation of these patients. Ultrasound is the most reliable and easy to use in emergency setting and in the ICU as a first approach. The focused approach is useful in management of these patients due its ability to obtain quick and focused results. This tool is useful to evaluate cardiovascular disease and its interplay with lungs. However, a detailed echocardiography evaluation is necessary in a complete assessment of cardiovascular involvement. Computerized tomography is highly sensitive, but it might not always be available. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance and nuclear imaging may be helpful to evaluate COVID-19-related myocardial injury, but further studies are needed. This review deals with different modalities of imaging evaluation in the management of cardiovascular non-ischaemic manifestations of COVID-19, comparing their use in emergency and in intensive care.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
