Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41661280›Full record

ReviewRadiologie (Heidelberg, Germany)2026

[Imaging of eosinophilic pneumonia : Differential diagnosis in radiological practice].

Daniel Kütting, Anton Faron

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Daniel KüttingKlinik für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Klinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Deutschland.
Anton FaronRadiologische Allianz eGBR, Hamburg, Deutschland. anton.faron@radiologische-allianz.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

clinical/methodical issueEosinophilic pneumonias are rare inflammatory lung diseases with heterogeneous clinical presentation and variable computer tomography (CT) patterns. Overlap with infectious, drug-induced, or neoplastic entities poses a diagnostic challenge in radiological practice. STANDARD RADIOLOGICAL

methodsHigh-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) is the key imaging modality. Typical findings range from transient ground-glass opacities to peripheral, nonsegmental consolidations. CT allows assessment of distribution, temporal evolution, and relevant differential diagnoses. METHODICAL INNOVATIONS: Advanced imaging techniques currently play a minor role. Quantitative CT and artificial intelligence (AI)-based pattern analysis are under investigation but not yet implemented in routine clinical practice. PERFORMANCE: CT provides high sensitivity for detecting parenchymal abnormalities but limited specificity. Diagnostic accuracy relies on the integration of imaging findings with clinical data, laboratory results, and response to corticosteroid therapy. ACHIEVEMENTS: CT is a well-established and indispensable tool for diagnosis and follow-up. Novel techniques remain largely experimental. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: In the presence of characteristic CT patterns and compatible clinical findings, eosinophilic pneumonia should be considered early. Lack of response to corticosteroids should prompt reassessment of the diagnosis.

Indexed as

Acute eosinophilic pneumoniaBronchoalveolar lavageChronic eosinophilic pneumoniaHigh-resolution computed tomographyLoeffler syndrome

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.