ArticleScientific reports2025
Value of lung ultrasound scores in assessing extravascular lung water in septic shock patients.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to explore the clinical value and accuracy of lung ultrasound in evaluating extravascular lung water (EVLW) in septic shock patients. Twenty-four septic shock patients who required mechanical ventilation and pulse indicating continuous cardiac output (PiCCO) monitoring in the Department of Critical Care Medicine of our hospital were included. Basic laboratory and demographic data for these patients were recorded. PiCCO monitoring was employed to measure EVLW at 0, 2, 6, 12, 24, and 48 h. The lung ultrasound score (LUS) was obtained via bedside transthoracic lung ultrasound (TTE), and the correlation between these two variables was analysed. Of 24 patients, 22 had satisfactory Doppler lung ultrasound results, and a strong correlation was detected between the LUS and EVLW measurements at the 0, 2, 6, 12, 24, and 48 h time points (all P < 0.001; ICC (interclass correlation coefficients) = 0.92, 0.91, 0.92, 0.90, 0.88, 0.71, respectively; all P < 0.001). The Bland‒Altman analysis revealed that only 4 (3.03%) points exceeded the limits of agreement. These findings suggest that pulmonary ultrasound scores can be utilized as an auxiliary metric for identifying EVLW in septic shock patients, suggesting that this technique is well suited for clinical application.
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.