Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 3, 2026

Bedside Ultrasound for Guiding Fluid Removal in Patients with Pulmonary Edema: The Reverse-FALLS Protocol
Published on: July 28, 2018
Lung Ultrasound Is Accurate for the Diagnosis of High-Altitude Pulmonary Edema: A Prospective Study
Weibo Yang1, Yuliang Wang1, Zewu Qiu2
1Department of High Altitude Disease, Xizang Military General Hospital, Lhasa, China.
Objective:
The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of lung ultrasonography (LUS) for high-altitude pulmonary edema (HAPE).
Background:
LUS has proven to be a reliable tool for the diagnosis of pulmonary diseases, including pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and pneumothorax. LUS also has potential for the diagnosis of HAPE. However, the actual diagnostic value of LUS for HAPE is still unknown. Our objective was to determine the feasibility of using LUS for the diagnosis of HAPE.
Materials And Methods:
A prospective clinical research study of adult HAPE patients was conducted. LUS and chest X-ray (CXR) were performed in patients with suspected HAPE before and after treatment, and pulmonary moist rales were recorded concurrently. The diagnostic value of LUS, CXR, and moist rales for HAPE (i.e., their sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values) were assessed, and the results were compared. The gold standard was the final diagnosis.
Results:
In total, 148 patients were enrolled in the study, 126 of which were diagnosed with HAPE (85.14%). Before treatment, the diagnostic accuracy of LUS for HAPE was as follows: sensitivity, 98.41% (95% confidence interval (CI) 100.60-96.23%); specificity, 90.91% (95% CI 102.92-78.90%). LUS had higher sensitivity (0.98 vs. 0.81, P < 0.01 using the McNemar test) than moist rales for the diagnosis of HAPE. LUS also had higher sensitivity than CXR (0.98 vs. 0.93, P < 0.05 using the McNemar test). After treatment, LUS was consistent with CXR in 96.55% of HAPE patients, and the concordance between LUS and CXR was high (k statistic = 0.483 P ≤ 0.001; 95% CI -0.021 to -0.853).
Conclusion:
The results indicate that LUS is a reliable method for the diagnosis and surveillance of HAPE. This trial is registered with Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (No. ChiCTR-DDD-16009841).
More Related Videos
06:15Protocol and Guidelines for Point-of-Care Lung Ultrasound in Diagnosing Neonatal Pulmonary Diseases Based on International Expert Consensus
Published on: March 6, 2019
05:50International Expert Consensus and Recommendations for Neonatal Pneumothorax Ultrasound Diagnosis and Ultrasound-guided Thoracentesis Procedure
Published on: March 12, 2020
Related Concept Videos
Lung Capacity
Pulmonary Embolism II: Diagnostic Studies and Interprofessional Care
Nursing Diagnosis
The nursing diagnosis focuses on evidence-based...
Ultrasound II: Endoscopic Ultrasound and FibroScan
Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS):
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease-IV: Assessement and Diagnostic Studies
Medical History
Formulating and Validating Nursing Diagnosis I
There are thirteen domains...