ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2025
Non-Invasive Hemodynamic Monitoring in Critically Ill Patients: A Guide for Emergency Physicians.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Use of Natriuretic Peptides in Critically Ill Patients: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Less-Invasive Hemodynamic and Tissue Perfusion Monitoring in Sepsis and Septic Shock: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Point-of-Care Transcranial Doppler Sonography at the Intensive Care Unit-A Practical Review of the Fundamentals.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hemodynamic monitoring is fundamental in the management of critically ill patients with acute circulatory failure. The invasiveness of conventional devices, however, often limits their applicability in the emergency department (ED). Recent advances have introduced non-invasive modalities (including echocardiography, bioreactance, and plethysmography) that extend the use of hemodynamic assessment beyond the intensive care unit. Among various available techniques, bedside ultrasound (Point-of-Care Ultrasound, POCUS) emerges as a particularly versatile tool for rapid and comprehensive assessment of cardiac function and volume status. When integrated with continuous technologies such as bioreactance or pulse contour analysis, it allows for the adoption of more dynamic and personalized fluid management strategies. Currently, a multimodal and patient-centered approach represents the most effective paradigm for non-invasive hemodynamic evaluation in the emergency setting. This strategy enhances diagnostic accuracy and enables timely interventions guided by pathophysiological principles. Despite the inherent limitations of each technique, their integration provides emergency physicians with real-time information, with potential benefits on clinical outcomes and resource utilization. This review aims to outline the pathophysiological rationale for adopting non-invasive monitoring in the ED and to critically evaluate the advantages and limitations of each technique, providing emergency physicians with a concise framework to guide clinical practice.
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.