ReviewBJR open2023
Imaging in patients with acute dyspnea when cardiac or pulmonary origin is suspected.
Review in BJR open, 2023. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Analysis of Lung Ultrasound, Computed Tomography, and X-ray in the Diagnosis of Common Pathologies among Critically Ill Mechanically Ventilated Patients-A Prospective Observational Study.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2025Article
- Dyspnea Management in Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department at Cantonal Hospital Baselland-A Retrospective Observational Study and Medical Audit.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- The occurrence mechanism, assessment, and non-pharmacological treatment of dyspnea.Medical review (2021) · 2024Review
- Review
- Clinical Review of Hypertensive Acute Heart Failure.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
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 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A wide spectrum of conditions, from life-threatening to non-urgent, can manifest with acute dyspnea, thus presenting major challenges for the treating physician when establishing the diagnosis and severity of the underlying disease. Imaging plays a decisive role in the assessment of acute dyspnea of cardiac and/or pulmonary origin. This article presents an overview of the current imaging modalities used to narrow the differential diagnosis in the assessment of acute dyspnea of cardiac or pulmonary origin. The current indications, findings, accuracy, and limits of each imaging modality are reported. Chest radiography is usually the primary imaging modality applied. There is a low radiation dose associated with this method, and it can assess the presence of fluid in the lung or pleura, consolidations, hyperinflation, pneumothorax, as well as heart enlargement. However, its low sensitivity limits the ability of the chest radiograph to accurately identify the causes of acute dyspnea. CT provides more detailed imaging of the cardiorespiratory system, and therefore, better sensitivity and specificity results, but it is accompanied by higher radiation exposure. Ultrasonography has the advantage of using no radiation, and is fast and feasible as a bedside test and appropriate for the assessment of unstable patients. However, patient-specific factors, such as body habitus, may limit its image quality and interpretability. Advances in knowledge This review provides guidance to the appropriate choice of imaging modalities in the diagnosis of patients with dyspnea of cardiac or pulmonary origin.
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.