ArticleCritical care medicine2026
Feasibility and Operator-Reported Utility of Transesophageal Lung Ultrasound As an Adjunct to Resuscitative Transesophageal Echocardiography in the Evaluation of Shock: A Multicenter Observational Study.
Article in Critical care medicine, 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo describe the utilization, feasibility, and operator-reported diagnostic and management impact of transesophageal lung ultrasound (TELUS) integrated into resuscitative transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) for the assessment of mechanically ventilated adults with shock.
designMulticenter observational cohort study using prospectively collected data.
settingTwenty-three hospitals from the Resuscitative Transesophageal Echocardiography Collaborative Registry (rTEECoRe) network. PATIENTS: From 1213 registry TEE examinations, 379 met the inclusion criteria for shock evaluation or hemodynamic monitoring in mechanically ventilated adults; 96 (25.3%) of these included TELUS.
interventionsNone. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsTELUS integration was associated with significantly higher operator-reported identification of shock etiology compared with resuscitative TEE alone (86.5% vs. 75.3%; odds ratio [OR], 1.95; 95% CI, 1.02-3.72; p = 0.04). Although overall clinical management changes were more frequently reported in the TELUS group, this difference did not reach statistical significance (78.1% vs. 71.7%; OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.82-2.41; p = 0.22). TELUS examinations were associated with longer procedure duration (median 21.5 vs.19.0 min; p = 0.01) and were predominantly performed by intensivists. Pulmonary findings, including B-lines, pleural effusions, consolidations, and A-line patterns, varied in frequency and were occasionally associated with specific respiratory or antimicrobial interventions. Procedure-related complications were rare and similar between groups.
conclusionsIn this multicenter cohort of mechanically ventilated adults with shock, adding TELUS to resuscitative TEE was associated with a higher rate of operator-reported identification of shock etiology and was feasible with minimal additional procedure time. Prospective studies with standardized TELUS acquisition and interpretation, independent adjudication, and evaluation of patient-centered outcomes are needed to define clinical scenarios of incremental value.
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.