ArticleThe ultrasound journal2026
Quantitative lung ultrasound spectroscopy: First comparison with gold standard computed tomography scan and standard lung ultrasound for diagnosis of pneumonia versus cardiogenic pulmonary edema.
Article in The ultrasound journal, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPneumonia (PNE) and cardiogenic pulmonary edema (CPE) are characterized by reduced air-spaces dimension and edema. Their distinction through gold standard computed tomography (CT) is challenging due to their pattern similarity. Lung Ultrasound (LUS) is a tool for monitoring the progression of lung pathologies. LUS is portable, real-time, and non-ionized; however, standard LUS (S-LUS) relies on the subjective visualization of imaging patterns, leading to poor reproducibility and lack of diagnostic specificity. To enhance LUS diagnostic utility, quantitative LUS (Q-LUS) was developed. Q-LUS quantifies imaging patterns and explores their correlation to different pathophysiological conditions. In literature, vertical artifacts (VA) quantification proved capable of differentiating PNE and CPE, however, this approach was never compared with gold standard.
methodsWe statistically investigate and compare the clinical significance of CT, S-LUS, and Q-LUS, in differentiating PNE and CPE. From a cohort of 55 patients, CT, S-LUS, and Q-LUS data are acquired. CT and S-LUS data of each patient are evaluated to assign a semi-quantitative CT-score and S-LUS-score. Q-LUS radiofrequency data are acquired in multifrequency with convex (2, 3, and 4 MHz) and linear (3, 4, 5, and 6 MHz) probes. VA are manually segmented, quantified into three spectral quantities, and statistically analyzed to extract 15 features for each patient. The diagnostic significance of the scores is tested through Generalized Estimating Equation models. RESULTS &
conclusionsResults show areas under the curve of 74%, 72%, 65%, and 53% for Q-LUS linear, Q-LUS convex, CT-score, and S-LUS-score, respectively, highlighting Q-LUS as the most significant tool.
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.