ReviewCureus2025
e²FAST: Integrating Inferior Vena Cava Ultrasound Into the Extended Focused Assessment With Sonography for Trauma as a Rapid Diagnostic Tool of Hemorrhagic Shock in Trauma Patients.
Review in Cureus, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hemorrhagic shock remains a leading cause of preventable trauma-related deaths, highlighting the need for rapid and accurate diagnosis. This study evaluates whether integrating inferior vena cava ultrasound (IVC-US) into the extended focused assessment with Sonography for trauma (eFAST), referred to as "e²FAST," improves early shock detection and guides fluid resuscitation in trauma patients. A comprehensive narrative review was conducted to assess the diagnostic and prognostic value of IVC-US as a rapid diagnostic tool for hemorrhagic shock in trauma patients. Studies published from 2000 to January 2025 were searched across PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases. Studies were included if they involved adult trauma patients and evaluated IVC diameter or the collapsibility index (IVC-CI) to determine volume status, shock, or fluid responsiveness. Two independent reviewers screened and selected studies based on predefined inclusion criteria. In total, 13 eligible studies, including randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective cohorts, and cross-sectional analyses, were reviewed qualitatively. Key outcomes extracted included diagnostic accuracy, fluid responsiveness, transfusion requirements, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and mortality. IVC-US demonstrated a sensitivity of 71% and specificity of 75% in detecting hypovolemia. A smaller IVC diameter (<1.5 cm) was significantly associated with increased ICU admissions (51.3%), higher transfusion rates (12.2%), increased emergency surgery requirements (16.2%), and elevated mortality (13.5%). Additionally, an IVC-CI greater than 38.5% provided 80% sensitivity and 85.7% specificity for predicting fluid responsiveness in patients with major blunt trauma. Post-resuscitation assessments (IVC-CI ≤28.6%) were predictive of fluid unresponsiveness (80% sensitivity, 75% specificity). Moreover, IVC-US reliably predicted 24-hour fluid requirements, helping in real-time fluid management. Integrating IVC-US into the eFAST as the e²FAST protocol enhances diagnostic accuracy for identifying hemorrhagic shock and provides critical real-time guidance for fluid resuscitation. Given its non-invasive nature, reliability, and predictive value for patient outcomes, standardized inclusion of IVC measurements in trauma protocols is recommended. Future research should prioritize multicenter randomized trials and standardized operator training to minimize variability and support broad clinical implementation.
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.