ArticleTurkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology2020
How to perform and interpret the lung ultrasound by the obstetricians in pregnant women during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.
Article in Turkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Taking the Next Step in Obstetric Critical Care: Cardiac and Lung POCUS Training for Obstetric Residents.POCUS journal · 2026Article
- Current Use and Barriers to POCUS in Women's Health: A National Survey of Veterans Affairs Medical Centers.POCUS journal · 2026Article
- The role of PoCUS in the assessment of COVID-19 patients.Journal of ultrasound · 2022Review
- Vitamin D status is not associated with clinical severity of COVID-19 in pregnant women.European journal of nutrition · 2022Article
- The Utility of Maternal Point of Care Ultrasound on Labor and Delivery Wards.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveEvidence for the use of lung ultrasound scan (LUS) examinations in coronavirus 2019 pneumonia is rapidly growing. The safe and non-ionizing nature of LUS drew attention, particularly for pregnant women. This study aimed to contribute to the interpretation of LUS findings in pregnant women for the obstetricians. MATERIALS AND
methodsLUS was performed to pregnant women suspected of or diagnosed as having Severe Acute Respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the first 24 hours of admission. Fourteen areas (3 posterior, 2 lateral, and 2 anterior) were scanned per patient for at least 10 seconds along the indicated anatomical landmarks. The scan was performed in supine, right-sided and left-sided positions, respectively. Each area was given a score between 0 and 3 according to the specific pattern.
resultsIn this study, 21 still images and 21 videoclips that enabled dynamic and real-time evaluation were provided. Pleural line assessment, physiologic A-lines, pathologic B-lines, light beam pattern, white lung pattern, and specific patterns for quick recognition and evaluation are described.
conclusionThe potential advantages and limitations of LUS and its areas of use for obstetricians are discussed. LUS is a promising supplementary imaging tool during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. It is easy to perform and may be feasible in the hands of obstetricians after a brief didactic course. It may be a firstline imaging modality for pregnant women.
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.