ArticleEuropean journal of pediatrics2025
Sonographic evaluation of lungs and diaphragm as a predictor for extubation failure in early preterm neonates: a prospective diagnostic accuracy study.
Article in European journal of pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Association Between Diaphragm Ultrasound Measures and Extubation Outcomes in Neonates: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Pediatric pulmonology · 2026Pooled it
- Lung ultrasound aeration score as a predictor of extubation failure in neonates: an updated systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Pooled it
- Can Nebulized Epinephrine Prevent Extubation Failure in Neonates?Indian pediatrics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lung and diaphragm ultrasound has been shown to reliably predict extubation failure (EF) in adults and children; however, its role in preterm infants remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of lung ultrasound (LUS) aeration score and diaphragmatic indices for predicting EF in early preterm neonates. In this prospective diagnostic accuracy study, preterm infants < 34 weeks intubated for more than 24 h were enrolled. Lung and diaphragm ultrasound was done 1 h prior to extubation. LUS scoring was performed by two independent blinded assessors. The primary outcome was the diagnostic accuracy of lung and diaphragm ultrasound for predicting EF within 72 h. We enrolled 45 infants, of whom 20 (44%) had EF. Gestation and birth weight were significantly lower in the EF group. The median (IQR) LUS aeration score was significantly higher in the EF group, compared to the success group [8.75 (5-12) vs. 4 (0-7); p < 0.001]. There were no significant differences in diaphragmatic excursion or diaphragmatic thickness fraction between the two groups. On logistic regression, LUS remained an independent predictor of EF (odds ratio 5.40, 95% CI 1.57-18.50; p = 0.007). The area under the ROC curve was 0.97 (95% CI 0.94-1.00) for LUS aeration score, with an optimal cut-off score of ≥ 7 having 80% sensitivity and 96% specificity in predicting EF.
conclusionsIn preterm infants < 34 weeks, LUS demonstrated reliable accuracy in predicting EF within 72 h. Measurements of diaphragmatic indices were feasible but did not prove to be good predictors of EF. WHAT IS KNOWN: • The incidence of extubation failure in preterm infants remains substantial, with reported rates varying between 10% and 80%. • There are no reliable tools currently that can predict extubation failure accurately in preterm neonates. WHAT IS NEW: • In preterm infants 34 weeks, lung ultrasound demonstrated reliable accuracy in predicting extubation failure within 72 hours. • Measurements of diaphragmatic indices were feasible on ultrasound but did not prove good predictors of extubation failure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41175289What 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.