ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Lung Ultrasound in Critical Care: A Narrative Review.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of outcome and tolerability of high velocity nasal insufflation and continuous positive airway pressure in children with acute respiratory distress.BMC pediatrics · 2026Article
- Bedside lung ultrasound versus chest CT in critically ill patients: a cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Unnecessary fluid therapy in patients with shock: Five classic fluid pitfalls and five ways to do it better.Annals of intensive care · 2026Review
- Optimizing transducer choice for the detection of alveolar-interstitial syndrome in dogs and cats: an evidence-based review.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Review
- Comparative Analysis of Lung Ultrasound, Computed Tomography, and X-ray in the Diagnosis of Common Pathologies among Critically Ill Mechanically Ventilated Patients-A Prospective Observational Study.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2025Article
- Standardized bilateral thoracic ultrasound image comparison as a tool for the diagnosis of pneumothorax: a pilot exploratory study.Journal of ultrasonography · 2025Article
- Lung ultrasound in the management of mechanical ventilation in pediatric critical care: a narrative review.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Review
- The clinical application potential assessment of the Deepseek-R1 large language model in lung cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- From Diagnostic Concordance to Implementation-grade Lung Ultrasound in Critical Care.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care MedicineArticle
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
Lung ultrasound (LUS) has become a crucial part of the investigative tools available in the management of critically ill patients, both within the intensive care unit setting and in prehospital medicine. The increase in its application, in part driven by the COVID-19 pandemic, along with the easy access and use of mobile and handheld devices, allows for immediate access to information, reducing the need for other radiological investigations. LUS allows for the rapid and accurate diagnosis and grading of respiratory pathology, optimisation of ventilation, assessment of weaning, and monitoring of the efficacy of surfactant therapies. This, however, must occur within the framework of accreditation to ensure patient safety and prevent misinterpretation and misdiagnosis. This narrative review aims to outline the current uses of LUS within the context of published protocols, associated pathologies, LUS scoring systems, and their applications, whilst exploring more novel uses.
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.