ArticleClinical rheumatology2026
Diagnostic performance of lung ultrasound for systemic sclerosis-associated interstitial lung disease: an international cross-sectional study from two tertiary care centers.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the diagnostic accuracy of two lung ultrasound (LUS) scores (≥ 10 B-lines and pleural line abnormalities according to Fairchild's criteria) for detecting interstitial lung disease (ILD) in systemic sclerosis (SSc), when applied independently at two referral centers using a shared standardized protocol. Secondary aims included evaluating the diagnostic performance of their combined use and their association with ILD severity.
methodsThis cross-sectional bi-center study included same-day LUS and high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT), using a 14-zone scanning protocol. ILD was defined as ≥ 10% lung involvement on HRCT. The diagnostic performance of each LUS score and their combination was assessed using OR and AND rules (the OR rule indicating positivity for either criterion, and the AND rule requiring both to be positive). Associations with disease severity, based on the Goh classification, were also explored.
resultsILD was present in 68% of the 108 patients included. The ≥ 10 B-lines cut-off showed 90.5% sensitivity and 84.4% specificity (AUC 0.875), while Fairchild's criteria achieved 93.2% sensitivity and 93.8% specificity (AUC 0.935). The OR rule yielded the highest sensitivity (95.9%) and NPV (89.7%), while the AND rule provided the highest specificity (96.9%) and PPV (98.5%). All patients with extensive ILD were positive for both scores.
conclusionsIn this real-life multicenter setting, both LUS scores showed high and complementary diagnostic performance when applied within a standardized protocol. Their consistent association with ILD extent supports their clinical use as non-invasive tools for routine SSc-ILD assessment. Key Points • Lung ultrasound shows high diagnostic accuracy for SSc-ILD across two international referral centres. • A standardized 14-zone protocol supports reproducible LUS performance. • ≥ 10 B-lines and Fairchild's criteria provide complementary diagnostic information. • Combining B-lines and pleural line criteria improves overall diagnostic performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.