Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39871558›Full record

ArticleCurrent medical imaging2025

A Comparison of the Diagnostic Value of Multiorgan Point-of-care Ultrasound between High-risk and Medium-to-low-risk Pulmonary Embolism Cases

Weihua Wu, Zhenfei Yu, Kang Cheng, Manqiong Xie, Shunjin Fang, Jianfeng Zhu

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Current medical imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Weihua WuDepartment of Intensive Care Unit, Hangzhou TCM Hospital affiliated with Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province 310007, China.
Zhenfei YuDepartment of Intensive Care Unit, Hangzhou TCM Hospital affiliated with Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province 310007, China.
Kang ChengDepartment of Intensive Care Unit, Hangzhou TCM Hospital affiliated with Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province 310007, China.
Manqiong XieDepartment of Ultrasound, Hangzhou TCM Hospital affiliated with Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province 310007, China.
Shunjin FangDepartment of Intensive Care Unit, Huzhou Third Municipal Hospital, The Affiliated Hospital of Huzhou University, Huzhou, Zhejiang Province 313000, China.
Jianfeng ZhuDepartment of Intensive Care Unit, Huzhou Third Municipal Hospital, The Affiliated Hospital of Huzhou University, Huzhou, Zhejiang Province 313000, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study aimed to explore the diagnostic value of multiorgan (heart, lungs, blood vessels) point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) in patients with high-risk and medium-to-low-risk pulmonary embolism (PE).

methodsClinical data of 92 patients with suspected PE, admitted to Hangzhou TCM Hospital affiliated with Zhejiang Chinese Medical University from July 2021 to June 2023, were retrospectively analyzed. According to hemodynamic status, patients were divided into the high-risk (n=28) and the medium-to-low-risk groups (n=64). Using computed tomography (CT) and pulmonary angiography (CTPA) as the gold standard, all patients underwent multiorgan PoCUS examination. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of different methods for diagnosing PE, as well as the time difference between multiorgan PoCUS examination and CTPA, were compared. Differences in measurement values of relevant indicators in all groups were analyzed.

resultsIn the high-risk group of patients, CTPA identified 15 cases of PE. In contrast, the PoCUS examination confirmed PE diagnosis in 14 cases (true positive), while 10 cases were diagnosed as true negative, one case as false negative, and three cases as false positive. In the medium-to-low-risk group, CTPA identified 50 patients with PE, while multiorgan PoCUS confirmed PE diagnosis in 33 cases (true positive), and identified 9 true negative, 17 false negative, and 5 false positive PE cases. Kappa test of the consistency between the results of multiorgan PoCUS and CTPA showed that multiorgan PoCUS had higher sensitivity, negative predictive value, and accuracy in the high-risk group compared to the medium-tolow- risk group (p<0.05). Cohen's Kappa value of the high-risk group was 0.710, indicating moderate consistency between PoCUS and CTPA results, while Cohen's Kappa value of 0.231 for the medium and low-risk group indicated poor consistency. There was a significant difference in ultrasound parameters between the high-risk and the medium-to-low-risk group (p<0.05). The time required for multiorgan PoCUS in both groups was significantly shorter than that for the CTPA. There was no significant difference in the time required for PoCUS between the two groups (p>0.05).

conclusionMultiorgan PoCUS has been found to have higher sensitivity and accuracy in diagnosing patients with high-risk PE compared to those with medium-to-low-risk PE, and a shorter imaging time compared to CTPA.

Indexed as

Point-of-Care SystemsPulmonary EmbolismAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityUltrasonographyCT pulmonary angiography, Multiorgan PoCUSMultiorgan point-of-care ultrasoundPatientsPulmonary embolismRisk

Identifiers

PMID39871558
PMCPMC13266681

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.