SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2024
Diagnostic accuracy of lung ultrasound to predict weaning outcome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Phenotype-based modeling of postoperative ventilatory liberation failure: A dynamic mechanistic framework for precision perioperative medicine.Journal of anesthesia and translational medicine · 2026Review
- Ultrasonographic predictors of extubation success in children: diaphragmatic, lung, and laryngeal assessment-a prospective pilot cohort study.European journal of pediatrics · 2025Article
- Predicting weaning failure from invasive mechanical ventilation: The promise and pitfalls of clinical prediction scores.World journal of critical care medicine · 2025Review
- Ultrasound predictors of extubation outcomes in pediatric cardiac surgery: A prospective evaluation of lung, diaphragmatic, and cardiac ultrasound.Annals of pediatric cardiologyArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to systematically assess the diagnostic accuracy of lung ultrasound in predicting weaning failure from mechanical ventilation in critically ill patients. Methods: We searched the relevant literature up to January 2024 in the databases Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed. Two researchers independently screened eligible studies and extracted data; disagreements, if any, were resolved through discussion or consultation with a third-party expert. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. Statistical analyses were performed using Review Manager version 5.3 and Stata version 18.0, applying bivariate random-effects models to estimate sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratios, and their 95% confidence intervals, as well as to summarize receiver operating characteristic curves. Inter-study heterogeneity was assessed using the I-squared statistic, and potential sources of heterogeneity were explored by meta-regression analysis. The study follows the guidelines for Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in reporting. Results: Fourteen studies were included in the systematic review, of which 13 studies (totaling 988 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis revealed an overall sensitivity of 0.86 (95% confidence interval: 0.77-0.91) and a specificity of 0.75 (95% confidence interval: 0.66-0.83) for lung ultrasound in predicting extubation failure. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.87 (95% confidence interval: 0.84-0.89). Meta-regression analysis identified lung ultrasound thresholds, reference standards (extubation outcomes), and study flow and time bias as significant factors influencing diagnostic accuracy. Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that lung ultrasound has high diagnostic accuracy in predicting extubation failure in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients. Despite some study heterogeneity, lung ultrasound proved to be a reliable predictive tool for extubation failure. Future research should focus on standardizing the definition of extubation failure, exploring the impact of different thresholds on the predictive ability of lung ultrasound, and validating its application in various clinical settings to enhance its utility and accuracy in clinical practice. Systematic review registration: This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42024555909). The study adhered to the guidelines set by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Details of the PROSPERO protocol can be found in Supplementary Table 1.
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.