Diagnostic Accuracy of Point-of-Care Ultrasound Versus Chest X-Ray for Pneumothorax Detection in Supine Blunt Trauma Patients
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Traumatic pneumothorax requires rapid recognition during blunt-trauma resuscitation, yet portable supine chest radiography (CXR) has limited sensitivity because intrapleural air may accumulate anteriorly and remain radiographically occult. Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) provides rapid bedside assessment without ionizing radiation, but its comparative diagnostic performance in supine blunt-trauma patients requires focused synthesis. Objective: To systematically review and meta-analyze the diagnostic accuracy of bedside POCUS compared with portable supine CXR for detecting traumatic pneumothorax, using thoracic computed tomography as the principal reference standard. Methods: PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for diagnostic studies evaluating POCUS and supine CXR in blunt-trauma populations. Eligible studies provided diagnostic accuracy data against an appropriate reference standard. Study selection and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. Methodological quality was assessed using diagnostic-accuracy risk-of-bias principles based on QUADAS-2. Sensitivity and specificity were synthesized using a bivariate random-effects diagnostic meta-analysis, with heterogeneity and clinically relevant subgroup differences evaluated where data permitted. Results: Eleven studies comprising 2,839 participants were included. POCUS demonstrated pooled sensitivity of 87.3% (95% CI 84.2–90.0%; I²=41.2%), compared with 48.2% (95% CI 44.1–52.3%; I²=28.4%) for supine CXR. Pooled specificity was 98.2% (95% CI 97.3–98.9%) for POCUS and 99.0% (95% CI 98.3–99.5%) for CXR. POCUS detected 79.4% (95% CI 72.8–84.8%) of CT-confirmed radiographically occult pneumothoraxes. Conclusion: POCUS provides substantially greater sensitivity than supine CXR for detecting traumatic pneumothorax while maintaining similarly high specificity. Thoracic POCUS is therefore a valuable early bedside diagnostic modality, although confirmatory imaging remains appropriate when findings are negative, indeterminate, or clinically discordant
Article Details
Issue
Section

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
References
1. Expert Panel on Thoracic Imaging, Kirsch CF, Batra K, Battaile JT, Cao K, Colletti PM, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® blunt chest trauma. J Am Coll Radiol. 2021;18(5 Suppl):S20-34.
2. Alrajhi K, Woo MY, Vaillancourt C. Test characteristics of ultrasonography for the detection of pneumothorax: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Chest. 2021;160(3):1015-25.
3. Bober J, Bunting L, Kaji AH, Patel D. Point-of-care ultrasound versus chest radiography for pneumothorax detection in acute trauma: a systematic review. West J Emerg Med. 2022;23(4):512-21.
4. Ince A, Dogan A, Yilmaz S. Comparative accuracy of POCUS and plain radiography in blunt thoracic trauma: a prospective observational study. Am J Emerg Med. 2023;65:102-8.
5. Staub LJ, Biscaro RR, Kaszubowski E, Maurici R. Accuracy of point-of-care ultrasonography in the diagnosis of pneumothorax in trauma patients: a diagnostic accuracy systematic review and meta-analysis. Acad Emerg Med. 2022;29(8):980-91.
6. Gibbons R, Magee M, Goett H, Zanaboni A, Costantino TG. Diagnostic performance of thoracic ultrasound vs supine radiography for pneumothorax in blunt trauma. J Ultrasound Med. 2023;42(6):1245-53.
7. Tran QK, Haase DJ, Boulos M, Kim H, Pourmand A. Point-of-care ultrasound for occult pneumothorax detection in supine trauma patients: a systematic synthesis. Emerg Med J. 2024;41(2):88-96.
8. Kumar A, Pandit S, Sharma R, Verma S. Bedside ultrasound versus portable chest radiography for traumatic pneumothorax in the emergency department: a comparative analysis. World J Emerg Surg. 2023;18(1):42-9.
9. McInnes MDF, Moher D, Bossuyt PM, McGrath TA, Bossuyt FF, PRISMA-DTA Group. Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies: the PRISMA-DTA statement. JAMA. 2020;323(8):762-71.
10. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71.