Experimental Lung Ultrasound Scoring in a Murine Model of Aspiration Pneumonia: Challenges and Diagnostic Perspectives

Background: Aspiration pneumonia (AP) remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality, yet non-invasive tools for monitoring lung injury in preclinical models are limited. Lung ultrasound (LUS) is widely used clinically, but existing murine scoring systems lack anatomical resolution and have not been validated for aspiration-related injury. Methods: We developed the Modified Lung Edema Ultrasound Score (MLEUS), a region-structured adaptation of the Mouse Lung Ultrasound Score (MoLUS), designed to accommodate the heterogeneous and gravity-dependent injury patterns characteristic of murine AP. Male C57BL/6 mice were assigned to sham, 6 h, 24 h, or 48 h groups. Regional LUS findings were compared with histological injury scores and wet-to-dry (W/D) ratios. Inter-rater reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: Global LUS–histology correlation was weak (ρ = 0.33, p = 0.114). In contrast, regional performance varied markedly. The right upper (RU) zone showed the strongest correspondence with histological injury (r = 0.55, p = 0.005), whereas right and left diaphragmatic regions demonstrated minimal association. LUS abnormalities were detectable as early as 6 h, preceding clear histological progression. Inter-rater reliability was good (ICC = 0.87). Conclusions: MLEUS provides a reproducible, region-specific framework for evaluating aspiration-induced lung injury in mice. Although global correlations with histology were limited, region-dependent analysis identified that the RU zone as a reliable acoustic window for concurrent injury assessment. Early ultrasound changes highlight the sensitivity of LUS to dynamic aeration and interstitial alterations rather than cumulative tissue damage. These findings support the use of LUS as a complementary, non-invasive physiological monitoring tool in small-animal respiratory research and clarify its methodological scope relative to existing scoring frameworks.