ArticleMayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes2026
Abbreviated Point-of-Care-Ultrasound Volume Assessment for Outpatient Hemodialysis Patients.
Article in Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the safety and feasibility of an abbreviated lung and inferior vena cava (IVC) point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) protocol for outpatient hemodialysis volume assessment when compared with standard practice. Patients and Methods: In this prospective case-control study, adults receiving long-term in-center hemodialysis underwent abbreviated POCUS-assisted assessment (n=15, 34%) or standard clinical assessment (non-POCUS, n=29, 66%). POCUS was performed during dialysis using a 6-zone lung ultrasound protocol with IVC assessment. Hypervolemia was defined as ≥3 B lines in ≥2 lung zones with bilateral involvement or an IVC diameter ≥2.1 cm with <50% collapsibility. The primary outcome was change in estimated dry weight (EDW) guided by POCUS when compared with standard clinical assessment. Secondary outcomes included falls, all-cause and hypervolemia-related hospitalizations, antihypertensive medication changes, and mortality. Results: All POCUS participants (15/15, 100%) met hypervolemia criteria at the initial assessment and underwent EDW reduction; 46.7% met criteria at repeat assessment. Median POCUS examination time was 6 minutes (range 4-10). Reductions in prescribed EDW occurred more frequently in the POCUS group (100% vs 41.4%). Postdialysis weight remained higher relative to new prescribed EDW in the POCUS group at study end. No significant differences were observed in intradialytic blood pressure ( Conclusion: An abbreviated 6-zone lung and IVC POCUS protocol is feasible and safe in outpatient hemodialysis and prompts earlier EDW adjustment. Larger randomized studies are needed to determine its impact on sustained volume control and clinical outcomes.
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.