ArticleActa anaesthesiologica Scandinavica2025
Diagnostic Methods for Pulmonary Congestion and Pleural Effusion: A Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 2025. 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
Abstract
backgroundPulmonary congestion and pleural effusion are key manifestations in patients with acute heart failure, contributing to over one million emergency department admissions annually in, respectively, the United States and Europe. Accurate and timely diagnosis is critical for initiating early treatment and optimizing patient outcomes. Routinely used diagnostic tools, such as chest radiography, have limitations in sensitivity and specificity. Emerging imaging modalities, including lung ultrasound, computed tomography (CT), and remote dielectric sensing (ReDS), may offer improved diagnostic accuracy, but their comparative effectiveness remains unclear.
methodsWe will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA-P guidelines to assess the diagnostic accuracy of chest radiography, lung ultrasound, CT, and ReDS for pulmonary congestion and pleural effusion. We will include prospective diagnostic studies comparing these modalities to a reference standard of pulmonary congestion or pleural effusion. Our search will cover MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and other major databases, without language restrictions. We will begin our search in April 2025. Sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios will be pooled using a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic model. Risk of bias will be assessed using QUADAS-2. DISCUSSION: This protocol defines the detailed methodology and approach used for a systematic review that will provide a comprehensive assessment of current diagnostic modalities for pulmonary congestion and pleural effusion. By comparing their diagnostic accuracy, we aim to guide clinicians in selecting the most effective tools for clinical practice. Additionally, identifying gaps and the risk of bias in existing research may inform future studies and advancements in acute heart failure diagnostics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.