F or nearly a decade, lung ultrasound (LUS) has been extensively used in the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of neonatal lung diseases because of its increased accuracy and effectiveness compared with traditional chest radiography, and LUS has replaced radiography in the diagnosis of neonatal lung diseases in some neonatal intensive care units. [1][2][3][4] However, during the development of LUS, it was expected that LUS could quantitatively evaluate the severity of lung diseases, with a so-called LUS scoring system. 5-7 On the basis of my accumulated experience with more than 10 years of research in this field, I found that the LUS score not only cannot be used to accurately assess the severity of neonatal lung disease but also may result in substantial discrepancies.The LUS score has the following major defects and shortcomings:1. A score of 1 is assigned for pulmonary interstitial syndrome according to the presence of "multiple isolated B-lines". However, the term "multiple B-lines" is not clearly defined in the scoring system. For instance, the LUS score would be 1 according to the system, regardless of the presence of 3 or 4 B-lines or more than 10 B-lines. This scoring criterion is obviously inappropriate because the number of B-lines is associated with the severity of edema.2. A score of 1 is assigned for focal lung edema, and a score of 2 is assigned for alveolar edema. For focal lung edema, coalescent B-lines should occupy less than 50% of the intercostal space in the whole lung field. However, for alveolar edema, coalescent B-lines should occupy 100% of the intercostal space in the whole lung field. The question is how the edema should be scored when coalescent B-lines occupy between 50% and 100% of the intercostal space in the field, which is a very common condition in clinical practice. 3. The system ignores the influence of the distribution zones of coalescent B-lines. Lung US commonly displays different patterns of coalescent B-lines in different lung zones. Coalescent B-lines are present in some intercostal spaces, whereas other spaces may be normal or abnormal, reflecting different degrees of