Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35444920›Full record

ReviewCureus2022

A Systemic Review on the Diagnostic Accuracy of Point-of-Care Ultrasound in Patients With Undifferentiated Shock in the Emergency Department.

Ingvar Berg, Kris Walpot, Hein Lamprecht, Maxime Valois, Jean-François Lanctôt, Nadim Srour, Crispijn van den Brand

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Diagnostic Accuracy of Ultrasound in Intensive Care Patients with Undifferentiated Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. The Incremental Role of Multiorgan Point-of-Care Ultrasounds in the Emergency Setting.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Review
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Ingvar BergEmergency Medicine Department, Haaglanden Medical Centre, The Hague, NLD.
Kris WalpotEmergency Medicine Department, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, BEL.
Hein LamprechtDivision of Emergency Medicine, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, ZAF.
Maxime ValoisEmergency Medicine Department, Hôpital Charleslemoyne, Montreal, CAN.
Jean-François LanctôtEmergency Medicine Department, Hôpital Charleslemoyne, Montreal, CAN.
Nadim SrourRespiratory Medicine Department, Hôpital Charleslemoyne, Montreal, CAN.
Crispijn van den BrandEmergency Medicine Department, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, NLD.
Erasmus University Rotterdam · NLErasmus MC · NLKU Leuven · BEStellenbosch University · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Early identification of the shock type and correct diagnosis is associated with better outcomes. Previous studies have suggested that point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) increases the diagnostic accuracy of patients in undifferentiated shock. However, a complete overview of the diagnostic accuracy of POCUS and the related treatment changes when compared to standard care is still limited. Our objective was to compare POCUS against standard practice regarding the diagnostic accuracy and specific therapeutic management changes (fluid volume administration and vasopressor use) in patients with undifferentiated shock in the emergency department (ED). We conducted a systematic review in concordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. A systematic search was performed using Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials, and clinicaltrials.gov. Two physicians independently selected the articles and assessed the quality of the studies independently with the Quadas-2 tool. All included studies used POCUS in adult patients in undifferentiated shock and described diagnostic accuracy or specific therapeutic management changes (fluid volume administration or vasopressor use) and compared this to standard care. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy. Secondary outcomes were the amount of fluid administered and vasopressor use in the ED. Only articles published after 1996 were included. There were 10,805 articles found of which 6 articles were included. Four out of six studies reported diagnostic accuracy, three reported on fluid administration and vasopressors. We found that the diagnostic accuracy improved through the use of POCUS when compared to the standard care group, increasing overall diagnostic accuracy from 45-60% to 80-89% when combined with clinical information. There was no significant difference in fluid administration or vasopressor use between the groups. In our systematic review, we found that the use of POCUS in patients that presented with undifferentiated shock in the ED improved the diagnostic accuracy of the shock type and final diagnosis. POCUS resulted in no changes in fluid administration or vasopressor use when compared to standard care. However, the results should be interpreted within the limitations of some of the studies that were included in the review.

Indexed as

hypotensionpocusresuscitationshockultrasound

Identifiers

PMID35444920
PMCPMC9009815
OpenAlexW4220966840

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.