Table 1

Summary of key demographic and epidemiological data as well as results from each of the included studies, arranged by sample size from highest

AuthorPublication (submission) datesDesign/enrolmentSettingExclusionsnCOVID-19 prevalence (%)Admission rate (%)LUS protocolLUS Dx thresholdReference standardSensitivity LUS (%) (95% CI)Specificity LUS (%) (95% CI)TPFNFPTNPrior training and experience
Volpicelli et al December 2020 (March 2021)Prospective, convenienceED (74%)
COVID unit (16%)
ICU (10%)
None14627034‘Complete’
(>12 zones)
High or intermediate patternPCR90 (88 to 92)53 (48 to 57)921101209231Documented evidence in performing LUS
Colombi et al July 2020 (October 2020)Retrospective, convenienceEDThose without clinical or epidemiological suspicion4867010012 zones>1 zonePCR91 (84 to 94)66 (58 to 74)311294997No details provided
Sorlini et al June 2020 (October 2020)Retrospective, convenienceEDNone38410012 zones>2 zones positivePCR92 (88 to 95)65 (55 to 74)264233463LUS accreditation, 1-day LUS course and >150 supervised scans
Bianchi et al October 2020 (April 2021)Prospective, convenienceEDPregnancy, confirmed COVID-19 infection on PCR3603910012 zonesSummary assessmentPCR86 (79 to 91)71 (66 to 77)1202064156LUS accreditation and >50 LUS examinations
Pivetta et al July 2020 (October 2020)Prospective, convenienceEDIntubated patients
Confirmed cases
Those requiring acute mental health care
228474012 zonesOperator interpretationPCR94 (88 to 97)95 (90 to 98)10166115LUS accreditation,
single learning module and >40 supervised scans
Lieveld et al July 2020 (October 2020)Prospective, convenienceEDPatients with uninterpretable LUS images1874610012 zones>2 zones positivePCR/final Dx92 (84 to 96)
92 (84 to 96)
71 (61 to 79)
80 (70 to 87)
7972971Certified and >20 supervised scans
Brenner et al December 2020 (March 2021)Retrospective, convenienceED
Medical ward
None174537712 zonesSummary assessmentPCR86 (77 to 92)72 (61 to 81)79132359Credentialled in LUS
Schmid et al July 2020 (December 2020)Retrospective, convenienceEDNone135297312 zones>2 zones positivePCR/CT77 (62 to 87)
65 (43 to 82)
77 (68 to 84)
73 (43 to 90)
30/139/722/374/8Training in POCUS
Zanforlin et al June 2020 (December 2020)Retrospective, convenienceEDNone111414820 zonesLUS score >3Final Dx85 (72 to 92)75 (64 to 40)3971649No details provided
Gibbons et al November 2020 (February 2021)Prospective, convenienceEDPregnancy110751008 zones>2 zones positiveCT98 (91 to 99)35 (20 to 53)7921910ACEP credentialled and >25 LUS scans
Tung-Chen et al October 2020 (January 2021)Prospective, convenienceEDNone96617712 zones>2 zones positivePCR72 (59 to 82) (irregular pleural line)
87 (confluent b-lines)
66 (49 to 79) (irregular pleural line)
33 (confluent b-lines)
39151223Experienced sinologists, performing >10 US scans per week
Haak et al May 2020 (November 2020)Prospective, convenienceEDAge <16
CCF
No LUS
Confirmed COVID
932912 zones>1 zonePCR/CT96 (80 to 99)
60 (23 to 88)
59 (48 to 70)
62 (41 to 79)
23/31/228/841/13>2.5 years of POCUS experience
Narinx et al June 2020 (September 2020)Retrospective, convenienceEDNone901712 zones>1 zonePCR93 (70 to 99)21 (14 to 32)1415916Board certified for LUS and >5 years of experience in US
Karagoz et al May 2020 (December 2020)Prospective, convenienceEDAge <18
Chest pain
Pregnant
Hypotensive
Previous thoracic surgery
If unable to obtain optimal images
724810012 zonesNot definedCT97 (85 to 99)92 (80 to 97)3213365 years of experience, 3-hour theory module, 20 live demonstrations
Jalil et al September 2020 (October 2020)Retrospective, convenienceMixed secondary care setting
(LUS performed <24 hours from presentation)
None69521008 zonesLUS-COV criteria (summary assessment of images)PCR86 (71 to 94)91 (76 to 97)315330No details provided, but all 3 operators were intensive care physicians
Fonsi et al May 2020 (September 2020)Prospective, convenienceED/COVID unitNone637010012 zonesNot definedPCR68 (53 to 80)79 (57 to 91)3014415No details provided
Bosso et al May 2020 (October 2020)Prospective, convenienceED/COVID unitNone534910012 zonesSeverity score usedPCR73 (54 to 86) (optimal cut-off >12.5)89 (72 to 96) (optimal cut-off >12.5)197324No details provided
Spiedel et al September 2020 (December 2020)Prospective, convenienceAdmission ward
(LUS performed <24 hours from presentation)
If PCR result already available
ICU admissions
492210012 zonesSeverity score usedFinal Dx91 (62 to 98) (optimal cut-off score >8)76 (61 to 87) (optimal cut-off score >8)101929Specific POCUS qualification, >3 years of experience in US, >1 year of experience in LUS
Walsh et al July 2020 (September 2020)Retrospective, convenienceEDHistory of Congesitve cardiac failure or other pathology likely to affect LUS491239Continuous posterior assessment+single anterior and axillary zonesOperator interpretationCT100 (76 to 100)80 (49 to 94)12028Facile in LUS, but no specific details provided
Pare et al April 2020 (June 2020)Retrospective, convenienceEDIf there was no CXR, LUS or PCR test
If the patient had an underlying condition predisposing them to B-lines on LUS
437072Unclear (median number of saved images=6)>1 B-linePCR89 (72 to 96)56 (33 to 77)24379No details provided. Images overinterpreted by 3 fellowship trained physicians
  • Dx, diagnosis; FN, false negative; FP, false positive; ICU, intensive care unit; LUS, lung ultrasound; POCUS, point-of-care ultrasound; TN, true negative; TP, true positive.