Respiratory failure & ventilation
Accuracy of lung ultrasound in the diagnosis of acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Authors' conclusion
Lung ultrasound is a better tool for diagnosing ARDS (higher specificity) than for ruling it out (moderate sensitivity).
Study context
- Population
- Patients assessed for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS)13 studies in meta-analysis
- Participants
- 1,999 patients
- Comparison
- Lung ultrasonography (LUS) vs CT or chest x-ray for ARDS diagnosis
- Outcome
- Diagnostic accuracy of LUS for ARDS
Methodological detailsQUADAS-2 risk of bias, GRADE certainty of evidence, 22 studies in systematic review; different scanning protocols and diagnostic thresholds, variable interrater reliability
- QUADAS-2 risk of bias
- GRADE certainty of evidence
- 22 studies in systematic review; different scanning protocols and diagnostic thresholds, variable interrater reliability
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
| Group | Sensitivity | Specificity |
|---|---|---|
| LUS | 0.69 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.81; I2 = 82.9%) | 0.95 (95% CI 0.85 to 0.98; I2 = 88%) |
LUS
Sensitivity0.69 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.81; I2 = 82.9%)
Specificity0.95 (95% CI 0.85 to 0.98; I2 = 88%)
Original publication
Accuracy of lung ultrasound in the diagnosis of acute respiratory distress syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Anaesth. Published 31 August 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →