ArticleHeliyon2023
Preoperative lung ultrasound for confirming the double-lumen endotracheal tube position for one-lung ventilation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors associated with selective fiberoptic bronchoscopy use after left double-lumen tube placement.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Observational
- Effect of patient position on the success rate of placing triple-cuffed double lumen endotracheal tubes: a two-center interventional observational study.Anesthesia and pain medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Insertion of a double-lumen endotracheal tube (DLT) is the most commonly used method for one-lung ventilation (OLV). This meta-analysis was aimed at investigating the performance of lung ultrasound in assessing the DLT position in OLV. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for related trials from inception to October 2022. The primary outcome was the performance of ultrasound or clinical evaluation in confirming the correctness of the DLT position, using fiberoptic bronchoscopy or intraoperative direct visualization of lung collapse as the gold standard. The secondary outcome was the time required to confirm or adjust the DTL position. Results: Five randomized controlled trials and three observational studies involving 771 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of ultrasound were 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.79-0.98) and 0.61 (95% CI: 0.41-0.77), respectively, while those of clinical evaluation were 0.93 (95% CI: 0.73-0.99) and 0.35 (95% CI: 0.25-0.47), respectively. The pooled procedure duration was 122.27 s (95% CI: 20.85-223.69) with ultrasound and 112.03 s (95% CI: 95.30-128.76) with clinical evaluation. The area under the curve for discriminating the DLT position was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.82-0.88) for ultrasound and 0.52 (95% CI: 0.48-0.57) for clinical evaluation. Conclusions: Compared to clinical evaluation, ultrasound has a similar sensitivity but a better specificity for confirming the correctness of the DLT position. Ultrasound is an acceptable imaging tool for assessing DTL placement in OLV.
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.