Trial reportCritical care (London, England)2026
Lung perfusion estimation by saline-contrast EIT without breath hold: a randomized cross-over trial.
Trial report in Critical care (London, England), 2026. 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.
- From derived signals to clinical stratification: interpreting EIT pulsatility in pulmonary embolism.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Article
- Frequency-domain band-pass filtering enhanced pulsation method for pulmonary embolism diagnosis and risk stratification: a two-center retrospective study.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Article
- Accuracy of electrical impedance tomography to detect perfusion defects in pulmonary embolism.Critical care (London, England) · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThis study aimed to develop and validate a non-breath-holding contrast-enhanced electrical impedance tomography (EIT) method using low-pass filtering for bedside assessment of regional lung perfusion in mechanically ventilated ICU patients.
methodsThis was a randomized cross-over trial. Each patient received two 10 mL 10% NaCl bolus injections via a central venous catheter, performed respectively during an end-expiratory pause (apnea) and during ongoing mechanical ventilation (non-apnea). In the non-apnea method, a 0.17 Hz low-pass filter was used to remove respiratory interference during perfusion analysis. Pixel-wise correlation was assessed using Spearman correlation analysis.
results20 mechanically ventilated ICU patients were included in the final analysis. Pixel-wise perfusion correlation between apnea and non-apnea methods showed good overall consistency (median r = 0.94, IQR 0.90-0.97). Global V/Q match%, dead space%, and shunt% were comparable between the two methods. The impedance drop duration was significantly shorter in the non-apnea method (5.3 s vs. 6.1 s, p = 0.008).
conclusionThe non-apnea contrast-EIT method provides consistent lung perfusion images with the conventional apnea method, expanding EIT applicability to patients intolerant to apnea and potentially yielding more physiologically realistic results.
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.