<strong>Objective: </strong>To explore the value of real-time bedside ultrasonography in the etiologic diagnosis of acute dyspnea.<strong> Methods:</strong> Sixty-two patients with acute dyspne...<strong>Objective: </strong>To explore the value of real-time bedside ultrasonography in the etiologic diagnosis of acute dyspnea.<strong> Methods:</strong> Sixty-two patients with acute dyspnea who were treated in our hospital from January 2016 to December 2020 were randomly selected and their clinical data were retrospectively analyzed. All patients were randomly divided into a control group for routine examinations (n = 31) and an observation group for real-time beside ultrasonography (n = 31). The costs of medical examinations, examination duration, and diagnostic results of severe pneumonia, acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema, pulmonary embolism, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and pneumothorax (including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic accuracy) of the two groups of patients were compared and analyzed. <strong>Results:</strong> Compared with the control group, the observation group had significantly shorter examinations (P < 0.05). Although the cost of medical examinations of the observation group tended to be higher, the difference between groups was not significant (P > 0.05). Moreover, there were no significant differences in left ventricular ejection fraction, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, or brain natriuretic peptide between the two groups (P > 0.05). Comparison of the etiologic diagnosis results between the two groups showed that the observation group had significantly higher diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and diagnostic accuracy for various causes compared with the control group (P < 0.05). <strong>Conclusion:</strong> Real-time bedside ultrasonography for the etiologic diagnosis of patients with acute dyspnea was quicker and had higher diagnostic accuracy;thus providing accurate guidance for the disease treatment, and having a higher promotional value in clinical practice compared with routine examinations.展开更多
文摘<strong>Objective: </strong>To explore the value of real-time bedside ultrasonography in the etiologic diagnosis of acute dyspnea.<strong> Methods:</strong> Sixty-two patients with acute dyspnea who were treated in our hospital from January 2016 to December 2020 were randomly selected and their clinical data were retrospectively analyzed. All patients were randomly divided into a control group for routine examinations (n = 31) and an observation group for real-time beside ultrasonography (n = 31). The costs of medical examinations, examination duration, and diagnostic results of severe pneumonia, acute cardiogenic pulmonary edema, pulmonary embolism, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and pneumothorax (including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic accuracy) of the two groups of patients were compared and analyzed. <strong>Results:</strong> Compared with the control group, the observation group had significantly shorter examinations (P < 0.05). Although the cost of medical examinations of the observation group tended to be higher, the difference between groups was not significant (P > 0.05). Moreover, there were no significant differences in left ventricular ejection fraction, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, or brain natriuretic peptide between the two groups (P > 0.05). Comparison of the etiologic diagnosis results between the two groups showed that the observation group had significantly higher diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and diagnostic accuracy for various causes compared with the control group (P < 0.05). <strong>Conclusion:</strong> Real-time bedside ultrasonography for the etiologic diagnosis of patients with acute dyspnea was quicker and had higher diagnostic accuracy;thus providing accurate guidance for the disease treatment, and having a higher promotional value in clinical practice compared with routine examinations.
