Point-of-Care Ultrasonography for Evaluation of Acute Dyspnea in the ED
Acute dyspnea is a common symptom in the ED. The standard approach to dyspnea often relies on radiologic and laboratory results, causing excessive delay before adequate therapy is started. Use of an integrated point-of-care ultrasonography (PoCUS) approach can shorten the time needed to formulate a...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Chest 2017-06, Vol.151 (6), p.1295-1301 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1301 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 1295 |
container_title | Chest |
container_volume | 151 |
creator | Zanobetti, Maurizio Scorpiniti, Margherita Gigli, Chiara Nazerian, Peiman Vanni, Simone Innocenti, Francesca Stefanone, Valerio T. Savinelli, Caterina Coppa, Alessandro Bigiarini, Sofia Caldi, Francesca Tassinari, Irene Conti, Alberto Grifoni, Stefano Pini, Riccardo |
description | Acute dyspnea is a common symptom in the ED. The standard approach to dyspnea often relies on radiologic and laboratory results, causing excessive delay before adequate therapy is started. Use of an integrated point-of-care ultrasonography (PoCUS) approach can shorten the time needed to formulate a diagnosis, while maintaining an acceptable safety profile.
Consecutive adult patients presenting with dyspnea and admitted after ED evaluation were prospectively enrolled. The gold standard was the final diagnosis assessed by two expert reviewers. Two physicians independently evaluated the patient; a sonographer performed an ultrasound evaluation of the lung, heart, and inferior vena cava, while the treating physician requested traditional tests as needed. Time needed to formulate the ultrasound and the ED diagnoses was recorded and compared. Accuracy and concordance of the ultrasound and the ED diagnoses were calculated.
A total of 2,683 patients were enrolled. The average time needed to formulate the ultrasound diagnosis was significantly lower than that required for ED diagnosis (24 ± 10 min vs 186 ± 72 min; P = .025). The ultrasound and the ED diagnoses showed good overall concordance (κ = 0.71). There were no statistically significant differences in the accuracy of PoCUS and the standard ED evaluation for the diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome, pneumonia, pleural effusion, pericardial effusion, pneumothorax, and dyspnea from other causes. PoCUS was significantly more sensitive for the diagnosis of heart failure, whereas a standard ED evaluation performed better in the diagnosis of COPD/asthma and pulmonary embolism.
PoCUS represents a feasible and reliable diagnostic approach to the patient with dyspnea, allowing a reduction in time to diagnosis. This protocol could help to stratify patients who should undergo a more detailed evaluation. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.chest.2017.02.003 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1869968400</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S001236921730199X</els_id><sourcerecordid>1869968400</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c425t-1b5b600690c46a5cdfeced3f266499de299cb1de98c24d9085d5ecb8d5018bfe3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1LwzAYx4Mobk4_gSA5emnNSxubg4exzSkM9ODOIU2euoyumUk72Le3c9Ojp4cH_i_8fwjdUpJSQsXDOjUriG3KCH1MCUsJ4WdoSCWnCc8zfo6GhFCWcCHZAF3FuCb9T6W4RANWMMoKLoZo_u5d0ya-SiY6AF7WbdDRN_4z6O1qjysf8Gyn6063zjfYV3hsuhbwdB-3DWjsGtyuAM-m1-ii0nWEm9MdoeXz7GPykize5q-T8SIxGcvbhJZ5KQgRkphM6NzYCgxYXjEhMiktMClNSS3IwrDMSlLkNgdTFjYntCgr4CN0f8zdBv_V9fPVxkUDda0b8F1UtBBSiiLrYYwQP0pN8DEGqNQ2uI0Oe0WJOhBUa_VDUB0IKsJUb-pdd6eCrtyA_fP8IusFT0cB9DN3DoKKxkHTz3ABTKusd_8WfANwm4Jx</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1869968400</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Point-of-Care Ultrasonography for Evaluation of Acute Dyspnea in the ED</title><source>Journals@Ovid Ovid Autoload</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Zanobetti, Maurizio ; Scorpiniti, Margherita ; Gigli, Chiara ; Nazerian, Peiman ; Vanni, Simone ; Innocenti, Francesca ; Stefanone, Valerio T. ; Savinelli, Caterina ; Coppa, Alessandro ; Bigiarini, Sofia ; Caldi, Francesca ; Tassinari, Irene ; Conti, Alberto ; Grifoni, Stefano ; Pini, Riccardo</creator><creatorcontrib>Zanobetti, Maurizio ; Scorpiniti, Margherita ; Gigli, Chiara ; Nazerian, Peiman ; Vanni, Simone ; Innocenti, Francesca ; Stefanone, Valerio T. ; Savinelli, Caterina ; Coppa, Alessandro ; Bigiarini, Sofia ; Caldi, Francesca ; Tassinari, Irene ; Conti, Alberto ; Grifoni, Stefano ; Pini, Riccardo</creatorcontrib><description>Acute dyspnea is a common symptom in the ED. The standard approach to dyspnea often relies on radiologic and laboratory results, causing excessive delay before adequate therapy is started. Use of an integrated point-of-care ultrasonography (PoCUS) approach can shorten the time needed to formulate a diagnosis, while maintaining an acceptable safety profile.
Consecutive adult patients presenting with dyspnea and admitted after ED evaluation were prospectively enrolled. The gold standard was the final diagnosis assessed by two expert reviewers. Two physicians independently evaluated the patient; a sonographer performed an ultrasound evaluation of the lung, heart, and inferior vena cava, while the treating physician requested traditional tests as needed. Time needed to formulate the ultrasound and the ED diagnoses was recorded and compared. Accuracy and concordance of the ultrasound and the ED diagnoses were calculated.
A total of 2,683 patients were enrolled. The average time needed to formulate the ultrasound diagnosis was significantly lower than that required for ED diagnosis (24 ± 10 min vs 186 ± 72 min; P = .025). The ultrasound and the ED diagnoses showed good overall concordance (κ = 0.71). There were no statistically significant differences in the accuracy of PoCUS and the standard ED evaluation for the diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome, pneumonia, pleural effusion, pericardial effusion, pneumothorax, and dyspnea from other causes. PoCUS was significantly more sensitive for the diagnosis of heart failure, whereas a standard ED evaluation performed better in the diagnosis of COPD/asthma and pulmonary embolism.
PoCUS represents a feasible and reliable diagnostic approach to the patient with dyspnea, allowing a reduction in time to diagnosis. This protocol could help to stratify patients who should undergo a more detailed evaluation.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0012-3692</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1931-3543</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2017.02.003</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28212836</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Acute Coronary Syndrome - complications ; Acute Coronary Syndrome - diagnostic imaging ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Asthma - complications ; Asthma - diagnostic imaging ; dyspnea ; Dyspnea - diagnostic imaging ; Dyspnea - etiology ; emergency medicine ; Emergency Service, Hospital ; Female ; Heart - diagnostic imaging ; Heart Diseases - complications ; Heart Diseases - diagnostic imaging ; Heart Failure - complications ; Heart Failure - diagnostic imaging ; Humans ; Lung - diagnostic imaging ; Lung Diseases - complications ; Lung Diseases - diagnostic imaging ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Pericardial Effusion - complications ; Pericardial Effusion - diagnostic imaging ; Pleural Effusion - complications ; Pleural Effusion - diagnostic imaging ; Pneumonia - complications ; Pneumonia - diagnostic imaging ; Pneumothorax - complications ; Pneumothorax - diagnostic imaging ; Point-of-Care Systems ; Prospective Studies ; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive - complications ; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive - diagnostic imaging ; Pulmonary Embolism - complications ; Pulmonary Embolism - diagnostic imaging ; Time ; Ultrasonography ; ultrasound ; Vena Cava, Inferior - diagnostic imaging</subject><ispartof>Chest, 2017-06, Vol.151 (6), p.1295-1301</ispartof><rights>2017 American College of Chest Physicians</rights><rights>Copyright © 2017 American College of Chest Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c425t-1b5b600690c46a5cdfeced3f266499de299cb1de98c24d9085d5ecb8d5018bfe3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c425t-1b5b600690c46a5cdfeced3f266499de299cb1de98c24d9085d5ecb8d5018bfe3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28212836$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Zanobetti, Maurizio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scorpiniti, Margherita</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gigli, Chiara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nazerian, Peiman</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vanni, Simone</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Innocenti, Francesca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stefanone, Valerio T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Savinelli, Caterina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coppa, Alessandro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bigiarini, Sofia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Caldi, Francesca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tassinari, Irene</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Conti, Alberto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grifoni, Stefano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pini, Riccardo</creatorcontrib><title>Point-of-Care Ultrasonography for Evaluation of Acute Dyspnea in the ED</title><title>Chest</title><addtitle>Chest</addtitle><description>Acute dyspnea is a common symptom in the ED. The standard approach to dyspnea often relies on radiologic and laboratory results, causing excessive delay before adequate therapy is started. Use of an integrated point-of-care ultrasonography (PoCUS) approach can shorten the time needed to formulate a diagnosis, while maintaining an acceptable safety profile.
Consecutive adult patients presenting with dyspnea and admitted after ED evaluation were prospectively enrolled. The gold standard was the final diagnosis assessed by two expert reviewers. Two physicians independently evaluated the patient; a sonographer performed an ultrasound evaluation of the lung, heart, and inferior vena cava, while the treating physician requested traditional tests as needed. Time needed to formulate the ultrasound and the ED diagnoses was recorded and compared. Accuracy and concordance of the ultrasound and the ED diagnoses were calculated.
A total of 2,683 patients were enrolled. The average time needed to formulate the ultrasound diagnosis was significantly lower than that required for ED diagnosis (24 ± 10 min vs 186 ± 72 min; P = .025). The ultrasound and the ED diagnoses showed good overall concordance (κ = 0.71). There were no statistically significant differences in the accuracy of PoCUS and the standard ED evaluation for the diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome, pneumonia, pleural effusion, pericardial effusion, pneumothorax, and dyspnea from other causes. PoCUS was significantly more sensitive for the diagnosis of heart failure, whereas a standard ED evaluation performed better in the diagnosis of COPD/asthma and pulmonary embolism.
PoCUS represents a feasible and reliable diagnostic approach to the patient with dyspnea, allowing a reduction in time to diagnosis. This protocol could help to stratify patients who should undergo a more detailed evaluation.</description><subject>Acute Coronary Syndrome - complications</subject><subject>Acute Coronary Syndrome - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Asthma - complications</subject><subject>Asthma - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>dyspnea</subject><subject>Dyspnea - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Dyspnea - etiology</subject><subject>emergency medicine</subject><subject>Emergency Service, Hospital</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Heart - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Heart Diseases - complications</subject><subject>Heart Diseases - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Heart Failure - complications</subject><subject>Heart Failure - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Lung - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Lung Diseases - complications</subject><subject>Lung Diseases - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Pericardial Effusion - complications</subject><subject>Pericardial Effusion - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Pleural Effusion - complications</subject><subject>Pleural Effusion - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Pneumonia - complications</subject><subject>Pneumonia - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Pneumothorax - complications</subject><subject>Pneumothorax - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Point-of-Care Systems</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive - complications</subject><subject>Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Pulmonary Embolism - complications</subject><subject>Pulmonary Embolism - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Time</subject><subject>Ultrasonography</subject><subject>ultrasound</subject><subject>Vena Cava, Inferior - diagnostic imaging</subject><issn>0012-3692</issn><issn>1931-3543</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1LwzAYx4Mobk4_gSA5emnNSxubg4exzSkM9ODOIU2euoyumUk72Le3c9Ojp4cH_i_8fwjdUpJSQsXDOjUriG3KCH1MCUsJ4WdoSCWnCc8zfo6GhFCWcCHZAF3FuCb9T6W4RANWMMoKLoZo_u5d0ya-SiY6AF7WbdDRN_4z6O1qjysf8Gyn6063zjfYV3hsuhbwdB-3DWjsGtyuAM-m1-ii0nWEm9MdoeXz7GPykize5q-T8SIxGcvbhJZ5KQgRkphM6NzYCgxYXjEhMiktMClNSS3IwrDMSlLkNgdTFjYntCgr4CN0f8zdBv_V9fPVxkUDda0b8F1UtBBSiiLrYYwQP0pN8DEGqNQ2uI0Oe0WJOhBUa_VDUB0IKsJUb-pdd6eCrtyA_fP8IusFT0cB9DN3DoKKxkHTz3ABTKusd_8WfANwm4Jx</recordid><startdate>201706</startdate><enddate>201706</enddate><creator>Zanobetti, Maurizio</creator><creator>Scorpiniti, Margherita</creator><creator>Gigli, Chiara</creator><creator>Nazerian, Peiman</creator><creator>Vanni, Simone</creator><creator>Innocenti, Francesca</creator><creator>Stefanone, Valerio T.</creator><creator>Savinelli, Caterina</creator><creator>Coppa, Alessandro</creator><creator>Bigiarini, Sofia</creator><creator>Caldi, Francesca</creator><creator>Tassinari, Irene</creator><creator>Conti, Alberto</creator><creator>Grifoni, Stefano</creator><creator>Pini, Riccardo</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201706</creationdate><title>Point-of-Care Ultrasonography for Evaluation of Acute Dyspnea in the ED</title><author>Zanobetti, Maurizio ; Scorpiniti, Margherita ; Gigli, Chiara ; Nazerian, Peiman ; Vanni, Simone ; Innocenti, Francesca ; Stefanone, Valerio T. ; Savinelli, Caterina ; Coppa, Alessandro ; Bigiarini, Sofia ; Caldi, Francesca ; Tassinari, Irene ; Conti, Alberto ; Grifoni, Stefano ; Pini, Riccardo</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c425t-1b5b600690c46a5cdfeced3f266499de299cb1de98c24d9085d5ecb8d5018bfe3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Acute Coronary Syndrome - complications</topic><topic>Acute Coronary Syndrome - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Asthma - complications</topic><topic>Asthma - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>dyspnea</topic><topic>Dyspnea - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Dyspnea - etiology</topic><topic>emergency medicine</topic><topic>Emergency Service, Hospital</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Heart - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Heart Diseases - complications</topic><topic>Heart Diseases - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Heart Failure - complications</topic><topic>Heart Failure - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Lung - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Lung Diseases - complications</topic><topic>Lung Diseases - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Pericardial Effusion - complications</topic><topic>Pericardial Effusion - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Pleural Effusion - complications</topic><topic>Pleural Effusion - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Pneumonia - complications</topic><topic>Pneumonia - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Pneumothorax - complications</topic><topic>Pneumothorax - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Point-of-Care Systems</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive - complications</topic><topic>Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Pulmonary Embolism - complications</topic><topic>Pulmonary Embolism - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Time</topic><topic>Ultrasonography</topic><topic>ultrasound</topic><topic>Vena Cava, Inferior - diagnostic imaging</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Zanobetti, Maurizio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scorpiniti, Margherita</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gigli, Chiara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nazerian, Peiman</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vanni, Simone</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Innocenti, Francesca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stefanone, Valerio T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Savinelli, Caterina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coppa, Alessandro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bigiarini, Sofia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Caldi, Francesca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tassinari, Irene</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Conti, Alberto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grifoni, Stefano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pini, Riccardo</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Chest</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Zanobetti, Maurizio</au><au>Scorpiniti, Margherita</au><au>Gigli, Chiara</au><au>Nazerian, Peiman</au><au>Vanni, Simone</au><au>Innocenti, Francesca</au><au>Stefanone, Valerio T.</au><au>Savinelli, Caterina</au><au>Coppa, Alessandro</au><au>Bigiarini, Sofia</au><au>Caldi, Francesca</au><au>Tassinari, Irene</au><au>Conti, Alberto</au><au>Grifoni, Stefano</au><au>Pini, Riccardo</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Point-of-Care Ultrasonography for Evaluation of Acute Dyspnea in the ED</atitle><jtitle>Chest</jtitle><addtitle>Chest</addtitle><date>2017-06</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>151</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1295</spage><epage>1301</epage><pages>1295-1301</pages><issn>0012-3692</issn><eissn>1931-3543</eissn><abstract>Acute dyspnea is a common symptom in the ED. The standard approach to dyspnea often relies on radiologic and laboratory results, causing excessive delay before adequate therapy is started. Use of an integrated point-of-care ultrasonography (PoCUS) approach can shorten the time needed to formulate a diagnosis, while maintaining an acceptable safety profile.
Consecutive adult patients presenting with dyspnea and admitted after ED evaluation were prospectively enrolled. The gold standard was the final diagnosis assessed by two expert reviewers. Two physicians independently evaluated the patient; a sonographer performed an ultrasound evaluation of the lung, heart, and inferior vena cava, while the treating physician requested traditional tests as needed. Time needed to formulate the ultrasound and the ED diagnoses was recorded and compared. Accuracy and concordance of the ultrasound and the ED diagnoses were calculated.
A total of 2,683 patients were enrolled. The average time needed to formulate the ultrasound diagnosis was significantly lower than that required for ED diagnosis (24 ± 10 min vs 186 ± 72 min; P = .025). The ultrasound and the ED diagnoses showed good overall concordance (κ = 0.71). There were no statistically significant differences in the accuracy of PoCUS and the standard ED evaluation for the diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome, pneumonia, pleural effusion, pericardial effusion, pneumothorax, and dyspnea from other causes. PoCUS was significantly more sensitive for the diagnosis of heart failure, whereas a standard ED evaluation performed better in the diagnosis of COPD/asthma and pulmonary embolism.
PoCUS represents a feasible and reliable diagnostic approach to the patient with dyspnea, allowing a reduction in time to diagnosis. This protocol could help to stratify patients who should undergo a more detailed evaluation.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>28212836</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.chest.2017.02.003</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0012-3692 |
ispartof | Chest, 2017-06, Vol.151 (6), p.1295-1301 |
issn | 0012-3692 1931-3543 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1869968400 |
source | Journals@Ovid Ovid Autoload; MEDLINE; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Acute Coronary Syndrome - complications Acute Coronary Syndrome - diagnostic imaging Aged Aged, 80 and over Asthma - complications Asthma - diagnostic imaging dyspnea Dyspnea - diagnostic imaging Dyspnea - etiology emergency medicine Emergency Service, Hospital Female Heart - diagnostic imaging Heart Diseases - complications Heart Diseases - diagnostic imaging Heart Failure - complications Heart Failure - diagnostic imaging Humans Lung - diagnostic imaging Lung Diseases - complications Lung Diseases - diagnostic imaging Male Middle Aged Pericardial Effusion - complications Pericardial Effusion - diagnostic imaging Pleural Effusion - complications Pleural Effusion - diagnostic imaging Pneumonia - complications Pneumonia - diagnostic imaging Pneumothorax - complications Pneumothorax - diagnostic imaging Point-of-Care Systems Prospective Studies Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive - complications Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive - diagnostic imaging Pulmonary Embolism - complications Pulmonary Embolism - diagnostic imaging Time Ultrasonography ultrasound Vena Cava, Inferior - diagnostic imaging |
title | Point-of-Care Ultrasonography for Evaluation of Acute Dyspnea in the ED |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-15T10%3A11%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Point-of-Care%20Ultrasonography%20for%20Evaluation%20of%20Acute%20Dyspnea%20in%20the%20ED&rft.jtitle=Chest&rft.au=Zanobetti,%20Maurizio&rft.date=2017-06&rft.volume=151&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1295&rft.epage=1301&rft.pages=1295-1301&rft.issn=0012-3692&rft.eissn=1931-3543&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.chest.2017.02.003&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1869968400%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1869968400&rft_id=info:pmid/28212836&rft_els_id=S001236921730199X&rfr_iscdi=true |