ArticleTrauma surgery & acute care open2024
Feasibility of ultraportable US in detecting clinically concerning recurrent pneumothorax in patients with chest trauma.
Article in Trauma surgery & acute care open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Bringing imaging to the bedside: unlocking the potential of handheld ultrasound for traumatic pneumothorax.Trauma surgery & acute care open · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Bedside thoracic ultrasound (US) offers numerous advantages over chest X-ray (CXR) for identification of recurrent pneumothoraces (PTX) after tube thoracostomy (TT) removal. Technologic advancements have led to the development of hand-held devices capable of producing high-quality images termed ultra-portable US (UPUS). We hypothesized that UPUS would be as successful as CXR in detecting post-TT removal PTX and would be preferred by patients. Methods: We conducted a single-center prospective, feasibility, study at a level I trauma center investigating the use of UPUS in patients with trauma with TT placement. UPUS images were obtained daily while the TT was in place and post-TT removal (ranging from 1 through 6 hours). A clinically concerning PTX on UPUS was defined as the absence of lung sliding on two or more intercostal spaces. Poststudy Likert surveys were administered to assess patient preferences. Results: Ninety-two patients were included in the analysis. The majority were men (87%), and the median age was 47 years. Thirty-five patients (36%) had discordant imaging findings. There were 11 clinically concerning PTX, of which 10 (91%) were detected on UPUS and 8 (73%) on CXR. Three patients required an intervention for post-pull PTX, all of whom were identified on UPUS. Eighty-four percent (N=70) of surveyed patients preferred UPUS over CXR with 92% reporting no discomfort with UPUS compared with 49% with CXR. Conclusion: Bedside UPUS is preferred by patients and can successfully identify clinically concerning post-TT removal PTX. Implementation of UPUS as a post-TT removal diagnostic tool is a safe and effective alternative to CXR. Level of evidence: Level II, diagnostic tests or criteria.
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.