ArticlePeerJ2026
Assessment of pleural effusion using intracavitary contrast-enhanced ultrasound: a pilot study.
Article in PeerJ, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To address the limitations of current imaging modalities, the present study aimed to develop and validate a novel intracavitary contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) approach for the quantitative assessment of pleural effusion (PE) volume and differentiation of exudative PE from transudative PE. Methods: This cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study prospectively enrolled 100 patients with PE undergoing US-guided thoracentesis. Intracavitary CEUS was performed using SonoVue microbubbles, and time-intensity curve parameters (A, B, and A+B) were analyzed. PE volume was measured based on the drainage volume, and effusions were classified as exudates or transudates according to Light's criteria. Diagnostic performance was assessed by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, and a linear regression model was developed to predict PE volume. Results: Exudative PE showed significantly higher baseline intensity parameter B (-35.18 ± 5.17 Conclusion: Intracavitary CEUS could serve as a reliable, minimally invasive, feasible radiation-free adjunctive technique for quantifying PE volume and differentiating exudative versus transudative PE in patients undergoing thoracentesis. The A+B-based regression model provides high predictive accuracy, while A and B values facilitate effusion classification. This quantitative CEUS workflow may facilitate clinical decision-making, and its utility for serial monitoring requires further verification in large-scale real-world cohorts.
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.