Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38454487›Full record

SynthesisCritical care (London, England)2024

Accuracy of respiratory muscle assessments to predict weaning outcomes: a systematic review and comparative meta-analysis.

Diego Poddighe, Marine Van Hollebeke, Yasir Qaiser Choudhary, Débora Ribeiro Campos, Michele R Schaeffer, Jan Y Verbakel, Greet Hermans, Rik Gosselink, Daniel Langer

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Critical care (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Reply to: Diaphragm excursion and diaphragm thickening fraction: commonality and conflict.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2025
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

9 authors.

Diego Poddighe *Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Research Group for Rehabilitation in Internal Disorders, KU Leuven, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Marine Van Hollebeke *Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Research Group for Rehabilitation in Internal Disorders, KU Leuven, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Yasir Qaiser ChoudharyDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, Research Group for Rehabilitation in Internal Disorders, KU Leuven, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Débora Ribeiro CamposDepartment of Internal Medicine, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo (USP), Ribeirão Prêto, Brazil.
Michele R SchaefferDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, Research Group for Rehabilitation in Internal Disorders, KU Leuven, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Jan Y VerbakelDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, EPI-Centre, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Greet HermansDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Rik GosselinkDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, Research Group for Rehabilitation in Internal Disorders, KU Leuven, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Daniel LangerDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, Research Group for Rehabilitation in Internal Disorders, KU Leuven, 3000, Leuven, Belgium. daniel.langer@kuleuven.be.

Funding

Research Foundation Flanders FWO project grant G053721N
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSeveral bedside assessments are used to evaluate respiratory muscle function and to predict weaning from mechanical ventilation in patients on the intensive care unit. It remains unclear which assessments perform best in predicting weaning success. The primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to summarize and compare the accuracy of the following assessments to predict weaning success: maximal inspiratory (PImax) and expiratory pressures, diaphragm thickening fraction and excursion (DTF and DE), end-expiratory (Tdi

methodsMedline (via Pubmed), EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and CINAHL were comprehensively searched from inception to 04/05/2023. Studies including adult mechanically ventilated patients reporting data on predictive accuracy were included. Hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) models were used to estimate the SROC curves of each assessment method. Meta-regression was used to compare SROC curves. Sensitivity analyses were conducted by excluding studies with high risk of bias, as assessed with QUADAS-2. Direct comparisons were performed using studies comparing each pair of assessments within the same sample of patients.

resultsNinety-four studies were identified of which 88 studies (n = 6296) reporting on either PImax, DTF, DE, Tdi

conclusionsDTF and DE are superior to PImax and DTF seems to have the highest accuracy among all included respiratory muscle assessments for predicting weaning success. Further studies aiming at identifying the optimal threshold of DTF to predict weaning success are warranted.

trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42020209295, October 15, 2020.

Indexed as

Respiration, ArtificialVentilator WeaningAdultDiaphragmHumansRespiratory MusclesROC CurveIntensive care unitMechanical ventilator weaningPredictive accuracyRespiratory muscle assessments

Identifiers

PMID38454487
PMCPMC10919035

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.