# Comparison of lung ultrasound scoring systems for the prognosis of COVID‐19 in the emergency department: An international prospective cohort study

## TL;DR

This study found that lung ultrasound scores did not reliably predict severe outcomes for hospitalized COVID-19 patients in emergency departments.

## Contribution

The study is the first international, multicenter evaluation of lung ultrasound scores for predicting severe outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

## Key findings

- Lung ultrasound scores showed no significant association with the composite outcome of intubation, ICU admission, or death.
- The study may have been underpowered to detect a weaker association between lung ultrasound scores and clinical outcomes.
- Results contrast with earlier studies, possibly due to changes in the pandemic context and treatment approaches.

## Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the lung ultrasound (LUS) scores applied to an international cohort of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with suspected COVID‐19, and subsequently admitted with proven disease, could prognosticate clinical outcomes.

This was an international, multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study of patients who received LUS and were followed for the composite primary outcome of intubation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission or death. LUS scores were later applied including two 12‐zone protocols (‘de Alencar score’ and ‘CLUE score’), a 12‐zone protocol with lung and pleural findings (‘Ji score’) and an 11‐zone protocol (‘Tung‐Chen score’). The primary analysis comprised logistic regression modelling of the composite primary outcome, with the LUS scores analysed individually as predictor variables.

Between April 2020 to April 2022, 129 patients with COVID‐19 had LUS performed according to the protocol and 24 (18.6%) met the composite primary endpoint. No association was seen between the LUS score and the composite primary end point for the de Alencar score [odds ratio (OR) = 1.04; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.97–1.11; P = 0.29], the CLUE score (OR = 1.03; 95% CI: 0.96–1.10; P = 0.40), the Ji score (OR = 1.02; 95% CI: 0.97–1.07; P = 0.40) or the Tung‐Chen score (OR = 1.02; 95% CI: 0.97–1.08).

Compared to these earlier studies performed at the start of the pandemic, the negative outcome of our study could reflect the changing scenario of the COVID‐19 pandemic, including patient, disease, and system factors. The analysis suggests that the study may have been underpowered to detect a weaker association between a LUS score and the primary outcome.

In an international cohort of adult patients presenting to the ED with suspected COVID‐19 disease who had LUS performed and were subsequently admitted to hospital, LUS severity scores did not prognosticate the need for invasive ventilation, ICU admission or death.