ReviewChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2026
A Comprehensive Review of the Approach to Ultrasonography in Neonatal Shock: The Partnership Between Targeted Neonatal Echocardiography and Point-of-Care Ultrasound.
Review in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The neonatal cardiovascular system is dynamic and influenced by multiple factors, which makes neonatal shock a challenging early clinical diagnosis. Real-time monitoring has been limited to indirect measurements of hemodynamic well-being, such as heart rate, blood pressure, capillary refill time, and biochemical markers of adequate oxygen delivery and oxygen consumption. Bedside diagnostic ultrasound to guide decision-making has become increasingly integrated into modern neonatal care. It allows clinicians to enhance physiologic monitoring, differentiate among diverse cardiovascular phenotypes, including time-critical conditions such as tamponade, that may present with similar clinical signs, and interpret complex, evolving physiology in real time. By providing this additional layer of physiologic insight, it may enable more precise, individualized management, with potential implications for fluid administration, vasoactive support, and ventilatory strategies. Among neonatologists who incorporate bedside imaging into clinical practice, some rely on focused point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) skills, while others have formal training in targeted neonatal echocardiography (TNE). This review outlines the distinct but complementary roles of POCUS and TNE, highlighting the specific diagnostic questions each can address, as well as their respective limitations in the evaluation of neonatal shock. Broadly, POCUS is designed to rapidly identify causes of clinical deterioration through focused lung, cardiac, abdominal, and cranial assessments. In contrast, TNE provides a more comprehensive and longitudinal evaluation of cardiovascular function guiding management over time. Differences in training pathways may create a perceived dichotomy between POCUS and TNE; however, these modalities are inherently complementary and should be integrated in the care of critically ill infants. Ultimately, the neonate must be assessed holistically, with ultrasound serving to augment-rather than replace-clinical judgment within the broader clinical context. A clear understanding of the interdependent roles of POCUS and TNE is essential to enable timely, meaningful, and integrated use of bedside ultrasound in the neonatal intensive care unit.
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.